forums.rs

Forums

F2P Discussion

Quick find code: 380-381-144-65560976

of 38
Plonster
Dec Member 2019

Plonster

Posts: 1,452 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I agree with you in saying that we don't want this game to have the same changes as Rs3 had made. But think of this change as a necessary one. The team would of sat down at a board room meeting and discussed what's the best idea to keep longevity in osrs. Yes it may cause some players to leave, but they don't care about minimal loss. They care about OSRS team creating more OSRS exclusive updates for us and keeping the majority player base that don't want the same updated content rs3 has. Clan Defy -
Rank [Smiter]

I make Combat Achievement Guides over on Youtube
@PlonsterOSRS

Also update over on Twitter
@PlonsterOSRS

26-Jan-2015 02:21:12

Rev The Wiz

Rev The Wiz

Posts: 5,538 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Interesting. I'm very curious to see how this will turn out as I do not normally play Oldschool anymore than I play the main game.

If permanent F2P were to be successful, I guess this would give me something to do when I don't have membership on the main game, Lol.

Also, with adding bonds to Oldshool rather than just buying/selling them on the main game, I think this would be a good direction for the Oldschool players as this would be a bit-more convenient for them to obtain than bonds just being accessible on RS3.
RTW
»
::.
General
of Silent Knight
.::
Recruiting

26-Jan-2015 02:24:03

Kymko

Kymko

Posts: 157 Iron Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Guys, read the post. You aren't purchasing a bond to play f2p. Bonds are used for actual membership. This essentially creates another revenue for osrs which allows f2p to play for FREE.

TLTR; F2P does NOT require bonds. Bonds are used to attain membership.

26-Jan-2015 02:35:51

Blade Nova
Aug Member 2023

Blade Nova

Posts: 50 Iron Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Dear OSRS mods,

I would not mind you adding F2P with membership bonds to OSRS.
I agree with the fact that OSRS could use some more players,
and hope that will actually bring osrs more succes, and with that more development!

However, i do think the total lvl requirement for voting on polls could definatly be upped. Up the total level requirement to 500, or even a tad higher. That wouldn't hurt anyone and would ensure more accurate poll results in the future.

Also i think if there's going to be extra restrictions for F2P players, wich i would vote yes for,, these should always be in effect, even when an account has been a member in the past.
Otherwise it's fairly easy to evade them by just buying a bond once. That would pretty much square out the whole effect of the restrictions in the first place.

A extra argument for this is that in the past it has been proven that gold farming bots dont nessecary shoo away from membership costs either.

And then about the restrictions already in place:

F2P without lobsters or yews feels kind of lame. For me however, it also feels like being a nesecary evil untill you guys can be certain that you are able to prevent botting 'completely' somehow. The restrictions being offered right now sound decent, but we'll just have to see if they are good enough. Definatly if yews and lobsters get back in F2P & with a possible (hopefully) increase in total players to monitor.

Finally i think it might actually be a nice thing to not be able and trade bonds trough the .G.E. this way prices of a bond will probably be less easy to influence.

Best regards,
White
Scaping since 2002.

26-Jan-2015 02:36:41 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 03:01:12 by Blade Nova

Plonster
Dec Member 2019

Plonster

Posts: 1,452 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Yeah I know what your saying kymbo. I think some people are ticked off thinking that people will sell the bond in ge to make in game cash to pay for skills or items. But the hard and sad truth is that people are being scammed, lured and the rwt market lives from it and prospers. Also the gold farming revenue for the sites. And people think that that is okay.

Bond idea is 100% better. rwt would still go on but they would slowly drop their prices and their market would soon burn out over the years.

Jagex is actually trying to exterminate bots and gold farming sites and it will take time. All revenue goes to jagex and creates a cycle for f2p players to have a chance at memebers by using in game currency to buy bonds that other players pay for.

In short this idea is genius. Jagex realised if people rwt and get away with it, why can't they start their own rwt system to grab that profit. Clan Defy -
Rank [Smiter]

I make Combat Achievement Guides over on Youtube
@PlonsterOSRS

Also update over on Twitter
@PlonsterOSRS

26-Jan-2015 02:40:29

AUTUMNELEGY
Apr Member 2008

AUTUMNELEGY

Posts: 1,046 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Here's a comment that I just left on a video about the topic:

Their reasoning and "proof" is laughable. Some random made-up graph based on data that they won't even share with us is meant to be convincing? Anyone who's taken an intro statistics class knows that a graph without any numerically labeled margins is useless and doesn't tell anything. Their margin there could be from 50,010 players to 50,020 players or it could be from 0 players to 100 million players. We don't know the volume of the decline that they're predicting. Oh, and what happened to "Oldschool is growing. We have more players than we did a year ago."? Furthermore, none of their reasoning for any of the effects that they propose will happen are backed up by and sort of concrete evidence. IVP is finally digging their claws into oldschool.

**** microtransactions, plain and simple. There's nothing wrong with paying a few bucks a month for membership, and the game has been perfectly healthy and, according to what the team continues to tell us, growing, in the past two years without any stable F2P. F2P would be nice, but I would MUCH rather not have it and not have bonds. Yes people transfer money between games and that brings elements of microtansactions into oldschool, but adding these bonds would increase the volume of that happening by tenfold. I really don't think that bonds are "healthy" for the game, and Weath does a great job of removing bots and RWTers, so I think we're doing just fine.

Unfortunately, this is going to pass. IVP was a bit clever this time. rock clicker

26-Jan-2015 02:52:21 - Last edited on 26-Jan-2015 02:53:20 by AUTUMNELEGY

Quick find code: 380-381-144-65560976 Back to Top