Feedback on Merge Request 1302: Reintroduce PvP + Wilderness Enhancements
Posted: Mon May 22, 2023 5:49 pm
This is my feedback regarding this merge request: https://gitlab.com/2009scape/2009scape/ ... uests/1302
The lack of wilderness PvP and inclusion of revenants throughout the wilderness is instrumental to the zeitgeist of RuneScape in 2009. Wilderness PvP should therefore not be forced upon those looking to experience a remake of the era. This proposed system locks off content from those wishing to avoid PvP, and on top of this, the additions to the "deep wilderness" (NPC spawns, fishing spots, ore rocks, item-to-banknote-swapping, and monster drops) are a clear-cut case of custom content that compromises the integrity of the project. Given the zealot-like insistence of authenticity elsewhere (such as the bare-bones nature of the client and the preservation of authentic bugs), it baffles me how these changes could even be considered. These proposals mimic the "wilderness rejuvenation" updates of Old School RuneScape: a game that members of this community and staff have repeatedly criticized for its failure to uphold the principles of its source material as well as its unrestrained power creep. Even the 2009Scape website promises, "Unlike Oldschool Runescape, we keep true to the Gower brothers' vision of the game." It is thus incomprehensible that these changes would even be considered, especially without even consulting the larger 2009Scape community, and I fear the precedent that they would set for the future of this project.
The manner in which to handle wilderness PvP is simple. It is an inauthentic game setting that doesn't affect those who choose not to engage in it, and thus it mirrors the iron-man modes exactly. It should therefore follow the same principles upon which the iron-man modes were implemented. Make wilderness PvP it an account-based toggle, disabled by default, with the option to opt-in (and back out, by speaking to the Lumbridge guide). There would be no additional benefits or lack thereof relating to a player's wilderness PvP status. This would create the most-authentic experience for those wishing to relive RuneScape as it was in 2009 while still allowing those who enjoy wilderness PvP to experience it.
I will also warn that level 45 wilderness is an entirely arbitrary point with no distinct boundary, and having potentially devastating repercussion for entering it is therefore highly dubious. The wilderness ditch exists to create a clear and unmistakable boundary that is nearly impossible to cross without intention such that players don't end up in a dangerous situation by accident. Such a boundary is essential to prevent accidental crossing and the potential repercussion it holds. However, without this clear boundary, level 45 wilderness poses the risk of players accidentally entering into unsafe, PvP-enabled zones without intending to, which is highly problematic. If you were to include a deep-wilderness PvP mechanic, the only convenient boundary for this is fence that separates the free and members-only areas at level 49 wilderness. The gates would also require a warning pop-up as well as modification so that they can only be moved through deliberately, just like the wilderness ditch. They could be made to function like the Al-Kharid toll gate or Grand Tree doors, allowing the player to move through and then closing behind. The warning for the wilderness lever would also require updating.
I can also only assume that the non-PvP elements added in the deep wilderness are to attract players to the area. The concept of bringing players into the wilderness to do non-PvP activities in an attempt to create PvP engagements is fundamentally flawed. It creates the situation where only one player is engaged in an activity that they wish to be engaged in. This will not only fail to create meaningful PvP engagements but encouraging such situations will certainly result in an increase in toxicity and a schism in the player base. Fundamentally, the situation being created is the entrapment of victims for bullying; it is therefore entirely incompatible with the creation of a universally-enjoyable gameplay element. Incentivizing PvP can only be done correctly by creating a situation in which both participants are willingly engaging in PvP. Apart from making wilderness PvP opt-in only, or by implementing the 2009-era PvP mini-games like the Duel Arena, Clan Wars, Fist of Guthix, and Bounty Hunter, I could not provide you with any suggestions on how to do that while remaining within the definition of a 2009-era remake.
Thus I ask, please reconsider these changes. Include the community within the discussion of how, if ever, to re-implement wilderness PvP. I suggest the creation a forum thread detailing the potential changes as well as any future potential custom content so that less tech-savvy players can help to provide feedback. Poll any custom content and tweak it until it receives at least majority support prior to being added, and remember to always consider the core goal of the project: to recreate the 2009 era of RuneScape.
TL;DR: These changes do not align with the stated goal of the project and would create a concerning precedent for future changes. Custom content should not lightly be considered and should be subject to community feedback and approval prior to addition. Wilderness PvP is inauthentic to 2009, like iron-man mode, and I would suggest implementing it under the same principles, if at all.
The lack of wilderness PvP and inclusion of revenants throughout the wilderness is instrumental to the zeitgeist of RuneScape in 2009. Wilderness PvP should therefore not be forced upon those looking to experience a remake of the era. This proposed system locks off content from those wishing to avoid PvP, and on top of this, the additions to the "deep wilderness" (NPC spawns, fishing spots, ore rocks, item-to-banknote-swapping, and monster drops) are a clear-cut case of custom content that compromises the integrity of the project. Given the zealot-like insistence of authenticity elsewhere (such as the bare-bones nature of the client and the preservation of authentic bugs), it baffles me how these changes could even be considered. These proposals mimic the "wilderness rejuvenation" updates of Old School RuneScape: a game that members of this community and staff have repeatedly criticized for its failure to uphold the principles of its source material as well as its unrestrained power creep. Even the 2009Scape website promises, "Unlike Oldschool Runescape, we keep true to the Gower brothers' vision of the game." It is thus incomprehensible that these changes would even be considered, especially without even consulting the larger 2009Scape community, and I fear the precedent that they would set for the future of this project.
The manner in which to handle wilderness PvP is simple. It is an inauthentic game setting that doesn't affect those who choose not to engage in it, and thus it mirrors the iron-man modes exactly. It should therefore follow the same principles upon which the iron-man modes were implemented. Make wilderness PvP it an account-based toggle, disabled by default, with the option to opt-in (and back out, by speaking to the Lumbridge guide). There would be no additional benefits or lack thereof relating to a player's wilderness PvP status. This would create the most-authentic experience for those wishing to relive RuneScape as it was in 2009 while still allowing those who enjoy wilderness PvP to experience it.
I will also warn that level 45 wilderness is an entirely arbitrary point with no distinct boundary, and having potentially devastating repercussion for entering it is therefore highly dubious. The wilderness ditch exists to create a clear and unmistakable boundary that is nearly impossible to cross without intention such that players don't end up in a dangerous situation by accident. Such a boundary is essential to prevent accidental crossing and the potential repercussion it holds. However, without this clear boundary, level 45 wilderness poses the risk of players accidentally entering into unsafe, PvP-enabled zones without intending to, which is highly problematic. If you were to include a deep-wilderness PvP mechanic, the only convenient boundary for this is fence that separates the free and members-only areas at level 49 wilderness. The gates would also require a warning pop-up as well as modification so that they can only be moved through deliberately, just like the wilderness ditch. They could be made to function like the Al-Kharid toll gate or Grand Tree doors, allowing the player to move through and then closing behind. The warning for the wilderness lever would also require updating.
I can also only assume that the non-PvP elements added in the deep wilderness are to attract players to the area. The concept of bringing players into the wilderness to do non-PvP activities in an attempt to create PvP engagements is fundamentally flawed. It creates the situation where only one player is engaged in an activity that they wish to be engaged in. This will not only fail to create meaningful PvP engagements but encouraging such situations will certainly result in an increase in toxicity and a schism in the player base. Fundamentally, the situation being created is the entrapment of victims for bullying; it is therefore entirely incompatible with the creation of a universally-enjoyable gameplay element. Incentivizing PvP can only be done correctly by creating a situation in which both participants are willingly engaging in PvP. Apart from making wilderness PvP opt-in only, or by implementing the 2009-era PvP mini-games like the Duel Arena, Clan Wars, Fist of Guthix, and Bounty Hunter, I could not provide you with any suggestions on how to do that while remaining within the definition of a 2009-era remake.
Thus I ask, please reconsider these changes. Include the community within the discussion of how, if ever, to re-implement wilderness PvP. I suggest the creation a forum thread detailing the potential changes as well as any future potential custom content so that less tech-savvy players can help to provide feedback. Poll any custom content and tweak it until it receives at least majority support prior to being added, and remember to always consider the core goal of the project: to recreate the 2009 era of RuneScape.
TL;DR: These changes do not align with the stated goal of the project and would create a concerning precedent for future changes. Custom content should not lightly be considered and should be subject to community feedback and approval prior to addition. Wilderness PvP is inauthentic to 2009, like iron-man mode, and I would suggest implementing it under the same principles, if at all.