You are entitled to your opinion on democracy’s limitations in modern politics as well as WoW, but to say OSRS hasn’t benefitted from the voting system is simply wrong. It’s a sign that not only do you not know what you’re talking about, but you don’t want to know and you are willing to literally make up lies so you don’t have to consider any opinion besides the one you already have. Nochangers in a nutshell, tbh.
1 Like
whether or not the voting system in OSRS has worked or not, such a system has no place in classic wow, which has since day one been advertised as an authentic recreation and a museum piece.
if people want an OSRS version of wow they should go campaign for that instead of trying to change classic into that.
5 Likes
If you want changes go play BFA.
5 Likes
and that’s straight from blizzard’s mouth.
4 Likes
Only my opinion, but OSRS bears little resemblance to the original runescape these days. All those player voted changes sure kept OSRS authentic, didn’t they?
6 Likes
Just because you repeat a lie many times, doesn’t make it true. Since day 1, Blizzard was very much against classic servers. “You think you do, but you don’t,” was the famous quote. But even that quote was based on a false perspective of what was asked for. Brack specifically mentioned they would not fix bugs, etc.
Then, once classic was announced, it was fairly vaguely described, and this has not changed all that much in the last year or however long. Blizzard has said they want to recreate the ‘spirit’ of classic, and certain blues have encouraged discussion as to what exactly that means. The no-change perspective to this question is very straightforward. But just because the opinion can be boiled down to an easily repeatable cliche and the people expressing that opinion patently refuse to engage, does not make it true.
I have expressed before what kinds of changes I think will be in the spirit of classic. My mentality is to view classic as its own standalone game which will never get an expansion and will stay in Azeroth. The only “Burning Crusade” changes I advocate for are guild banks (I have laid out my reasoning in threads both on these forums and the old ones) and finishing the last two class quests from the ST dungeon. My thinking for this is simple: clearly these were intended quests, since every other class got them during vanilla. Blizzard just ran out of time before they released BC. Likewise, other changes I would appreciate would be cut content that was intended for vanilla such as the Ashbringer quest line, Zalashji’s purpose (which has been rumored to involve the Ashbringer) and the Azshara Crater BG.
Responding to these changes by saying “go play BfA” is simply idiotic, and knowingly responding to fair points with a troll response designed to either shut down discussion or take a long time to explain like this.
2 Likes
Could you expand on that? The RS community overwhelmingly views OSRS as a success and it’s much more popular than the ‘current’ version of the game. If you mean that it isn’t authentic because additional features were voted on with supermajorities that is circular logic, so try and make a different point.
they have repeatedly said things such as authentic and museum piece, that isn’t vague.
just because you disagree means nothing.
furthermore in an interview during blizzcon they said if you wanted changes to go play BFA.
and that’s great that this is what you want. but this is only what you want. by having something similar to OSRS you open the door to anyone to vote for a change that even goes against the spirit of vanilla.
except that is literally from blizzards mouth. if you want changes, go play BFA.
5 Likes
What does it say when by Jagex’s own set standards player voted content should not even be in the game? There were not enough votes received for that option to be included.
“We know that there were not enough votes to add this change, but we’re going to add it anyway”?
The Runescape equivalent of current WoW retail players may enjoy OSRS, but that does not mean that OSRS bears any real resemblance to the original Runescape. Every player voted change takes away from that authenticity.
There may be those who prefer OSRS because many conveniences have been “player voted”, but to claim that OSRS is even remotely authentic to the original Runescape is less than honest, IMO.
2 Likes
Most of that response was not a response, so I will ignore everything you said besides what can be responded to with things other than “Yuh-huh/Nuh-uh”.
The mechanism to prevent this is to make it so only accounts with at least one level 60 can vote. This not only filters out many of the “retail trolls that would vote to ruin the game with BfA crap” that you and others have claimed exist in the past, but it would also filter out some of the less hardcore vanilla fans who level slower/give up before hitting 60. Then, the requirement of a 70% yes vote ensures that only very popular ideas that most people want make the cut. If no one wants these changes like you claim, then there should be no issue. You and the other no-changers who allegedly make up the majority of the playerbase, or even 30% of it, could vote no on literally everything as it is suggested and no changes would ever happen.
The plus side is that if there ever is a very good idea that would fix the game, people could vote it in without having to rely on Blizzard’s judgement, which I think we can all agree is less than ideal to say the least. And no one would have to claim that their opinion is the majority anymore, since we would have the exact numbers of who wants what change. And there’s always the ability to remove the change if it turns out bad somehow.
I’m a no changer and I’d appreciate it if you didn’t lump us all in together. Doing that is just as ignorant as someone knowingly making stuff up. I was with you till you said the last line. Your comment fits right in with the narrative of polotics. One person refuses to see any view point but their own. The person on the other side of the argument lumps an entire group together based on the actions of one person. You are equally in the wrong here.
You took a great counter argument and ruined it with one sentence.
1 Like
this would hold water if retail players didn’t get FREE ACCESS TO CLASSIC.
but seeing as they get access for free, just for being subbed to retail, and thus can level when they want to and troll a vote after reaching 60, i would rather not.
you can try to say the rest doesn’t matter all you want but it is the truth. the entire goal of classic since day one has been stated as a faithful, authentic, museum piece recreation. that does not include using the OSRS style system.
I don’t care if no changers were 85% of the population at level cap, such a system still has no place in classic at all, because it goes AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF VANILLA BEING VANILLA.
You can try to belittle no changers all you want, but remember one thing, they are the ones who actually don’t have what they want. those who want changes? their is a game out there with changes for you.
if you change classic, what do those who just want a faithful rendition of classic have? NOTHING.
5 Likes
Could you be more specific about what you’re saying? That page seems to say that players barely missed the votes required to allow f2p (which existed in the original RS) and so Jagex decided to do a favor to their players and not charge an extra fee.
" Although the vote count only reached 449,351 and not 500,000, [Jagex]decided not to charge the additional fee of five USD for the first six months (excluding the free month); however, on [7 June] [2013], they announced that OSRS is here to stay and there will be no additional fee.[[4]]
How exactly does that affect ‘authenticity’ in any way, let alone a negative way? It’s not a convenience issue, it was an issue of making the OS version available to anyone who wants to play it.
OSRS isn’t authentic because OSRS doesn’t resemble the old school version of the game.
that is his point.
the name is Old School RuneScape, but it isn’t Old School Rune Scape at all. It is something beyond that.
Which is exactly the issue from the classic perspective. Classic is supposed to be Authentic, and if we add in the voting system in question, it is already not authentic. you can say what you want about people voting against changes but i know several people who have said that if classic implements such a system they will purposely level a hunter (the easiest class to level) purely for the purpose of trolling votes.
2 Likes
I’m sorry if you felt offended by what I said. It was not my intention to lump you in incorrectly. However, your reaction basically reads, “Your last sentence made me mad so I’m going to ignore your points. NO CHANGES!” which is very similar to the characterization that apparently offended you.
Literally a made up lie with no evidence. As I said before, many people who love classic will never get to 60 because of the time investment. How many do you expect will take time from BfA, a game they presumably enjoy, to slowly grind out a max level character in a game they (according to you based on nothing) hate and want to ruin for no reason? Enough to sway a 70% supermajority? Incredibly unlikely.
made up lie? one of the guys i work with plays OSRS, he told me himself its not similar to the way the game was back then in the slightest.
and how many do i honestly expect to do it? i don’t know. but merely the fact that some are willing to do so, is enough to know that i do not want such a system in place at all.
Furthermore, again, Blizzard has stated since day 1, authentic recreation.
that does not include this voting system and such it should not be in at all.
2 Likes
Oh wow, some guy you work with said it? Suddenly, I’m convinced. Though that isn’t what I said you were lying about. Another dishonest argumentation tactic, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you simply lack reading comprehension.
Thought-stopping cliche. This made-up issue is a non-issue, for reasons I posted in the comment you replied to, but you ignored them, presumably because you have no counter argument. Your response, predictably is to repeat the same several phrases you regularly do to avoid engaging in the discussion.
Another lie that has been addressed earlier in this thread.
Just imagine if you could vote to have guild banks put into the game.
Check that page again.
That same 500,000 votes was required for player voted content to be added (Regular membership polls to decide new content). Notice that there was no “possible” regarding that player voted content. Anything below 500,000 votes was “NO”. The results of that vote were that player voted content should not be added. Jagex, though, decided that the results of the vote didn’t matter and they added that player voted content anyway.
Now you could say that Jagex decided to do a “favor” for those that voted for that player voted content, but how much a favor was it for the players that didn;t want player voted content? In addition, what is to prevent jagex from doing a “favor” for players that want a specific change but do not get the required votes for that change?
You have rock solid, irrefutable proof that Jagex feels they can ignore the voting results in the fact that they have already done so.
1 Like