The Instigator
Vegeta
Pro (for)
Losing
31 Points
The Contender
TheSkeptic
Con (against)
Winning
52 Points

RuneScape is fundamentally better than World of Warcraft

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/26/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,633 times Debate No: 10247
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (22)
Votes (14)

 

Vegeta

Pro

I believe RuneScape is a better game in general and fundamentally than World of Warcraft.

World of Warcraft does have RuneScape beat in graphics, and UI, but the flaws in WoW compared to the depth of RuneScape, make RS a far better choice.

First, I'd like to thank whoever my opponent is in advance and would like to say let us keep it clean and talk about the Fundamental aspects of each game, not judge it on pretty objects and graphics (as to be fair, their are games with far better graphics than WoW, which pale in comparison to WoW).

World PvP:

RS: Has dangerous World PvP where you can force the loss of armour from your opponent.

WoW: Only has safe World PvP. No penalty.

Safe PvP:
RS: Offers over 15 different forms of safe PvP.

WoW: Offers only 3 forms of ANY PvP, all which are safe.

Subscription Price:

RS: You can pay nothing and always play the game on F2P. You can pay $5-$6 (depending if you are an old member) and play P2P.

WoW: You must pay $15 a month to play, including the price of $40 per expansion when they are first released.

Expansions:

RS: Has no expansions, you get frequent updates every week at no additional costs.

WoW: You must purchase expansions for the continued updates, otherwise face playing in a non-updated part of the game. Expansions costs $40 when they are first released. Not to mention you have to purchase the game itself.

Purchasing of Game:

RS: The game is free to download, and then you choose to play for free, or subscribe to members, to access Memeber Areas of the world.

WoW: The game originally cost $40 when first released, you must purchase the game, and then subscribe to continue playing, then purchase the expansions. There are currently 2 expansions, 1 planned next year, and then the price of the main game (along with the monthly subscription fees).

Free to Play:

RS: If you want to stop paying, you can revert to F2P status and still have access to your character and do whatever, outside the scope of P2P

WoW: If you don't pay, you don't play. Period

Disk Space:

RS: The game takes up less than 100mb

WoW: The game takes up over 20 Gigabytes. (Over 200x the size of RS)

Class Limitations:

RS: There are no limitations to what your character can do, you can mage, melee, or range if you choose, without having to start all over.

WoW: You are forced to start over (re-roll) a character and play and different class if you want to try Mageing instead of Meleeing. You have to redo all the quests, leveling, and areas you already beaten once before, for each class you choose to play as. There is a limit of 9 classes per server.

Skill Limitations:

RS:You can raise any skill you choose, without having to unlearn anything previously.

WoW: You can only learn two trade skills, and then you have to re-roll a different character or delete the skills and levels you have learned on that character.

Server Limitations:

RS: You can play on any server you wish, with the same character. Meaning you can play with friends/people anywhere

WoW: You can only play on the server you created the character on, meaning if you have a friend that plays WoW, but he/she plays on a different server, you have to start all over on that server, or pay a $20 transfer fee.

Factions:

RS:You can battle/intermingle/group with whoever you want in RuneScape, no matter the server, or who they are.

WoW: You also cannot trade, talk, or group with people of the opposing faction.

Challenge of the Game:

RS: You actually have to put effort and time into the game, the Max Combat level is 138, and that is just in combat, not skills. It takes time, and a lot of effort to reach the Max Level, it is impossible to do it in 2 months, and for the casual gamer would take over a year. The point isn't to reach Max Level asap, it is to enjoy the game while reaching Max Level, if raising levels isn't what people like doing, then they shouldn't be playing an MMORPG, play the Sims, or a FPS like Halo.

WoW: You can reach Max Level in 2-3 days. Trust me, I had 7 Max Level characters in WoW at the time 70 was Max, and I put very little effort into them. WoW also has halved the XP required to level characters since I quit, and added the linked account system, where your friends can level you up. The result being nearly everyone on WoW has a max level character and thinks they are awesome, it breeds cockiness, and arrogance; which ruins the community. The world isn't a nice place, but neither is a world ruled by immature 13 year olds.

Loot System:

RS: You can lootshare to split the loot as you kill boss NPC's which tend to be very difficult to kill, or you can coinshare which automatically sends the item to GE, and splits the cash with your entire party. Even if you don't get the weapon you want, you can earn enough money from fighting it enough times, to purchase it.

WoW: You can redo the exact same dungeon a hundred times and be no closer to obtaining the item you want, then you were the first time. There is a Need/Greed system, which allows you to "need" on items you really want, but the fact anyone can do it, and chances are if you need the item, there is a reason for it and so does someone else needs it also. Not only are some items extremely rare drops, it is an all or nothing gamble, that gets old, especially if you raid. You generally have to run a whole dungeon again, just to attempt to fight a boss, which if the time it takes to run a dungeon at no benefit to you (as you get no XP after a certain point), you can only do it if you have a group of people willing to do it with you...and don't get me started on how your group has to be smart and not those that "drop group" if the boss they need doesn't drop what they want.

Needing Groups:

RS: You do not need a group to be successful in RuneScape, anything you need to be successful in RS you can do it alone without relying on anyone. However there are things that having a group makes it easier and more fun to do things with. Like maybe you can kill a Boss NPC 4-5 times instead of the 1 time if it was just you, the difference being you now would split the loot to be fair.

WoW: You will need a group to be successful, there are quest that REQUIRE groups, instances REQUIRE groups, raids REQUIRE groups. The best PvP gear (arena) REQUIRES groups. You can't advance to a certain part of the story, or make it to certain areas without groups either. It is very group oriented for gear especially, which means the majority of your success will be if you can depend on your group members and their schedules, it is not uncommon to waste your time in an instance, or to spend time waiting for an instance or raid to start, simply because of the grouping aspect.

-------------
I have more points, but sadly have run out of Argument Room, maybe next round I'll list my last few points.

Again, I would like to have an intellectual and friendly debate, as this is of course always a matter of opinion (based on aspects and facts) and people hold different values when it comes to entertainment.

I would prefer my opponent to be someone who is familiar with both RuneScape and World of Warcraft so we can have a challenging and insightful debate. This is not "hating" on WoW or RS, not to mention it is easier to make a case to the untrained eye that WoW is the better game, at the very least, let those that read this debate leave with a little bit more knowledge about both games then they had coming into this debate.

Vote Pro!
TheSkeptic

Con

I thank my opponent for creating this open debate that is most certainly interesting and a different take from the usual debates that take place on this website. Since my opponent has supplied a list of criteria, I will respond to them accordingly. However, before that I want to talk about the nature of the subjective nature in this debate:

====================
Philosophical fuzziness of the resolution
====================

Before I begin, I will note that ultimately the cases for both sides will be philosophically fuzzy, given that the value of art itself is subjective (if you wish to counter this claim, then so be it). However, even though we can assume the value of art is subjective we can still try to find some ground to decide which games are better than others. We can imagine that the term "fundamentally better" can refer to a game that serves it's purpose better - entertaining it's customers. For example, if you were to attempt to create a "good" FPS game then it would be in your best interest to have a consistent damage per shot system, otherwise the entire challenge of the game would be skewed. Imagine if the damage your assault rifle did per bullet was inconsistent; obviously the game would not fair well. It's facts like this that can help us lean towards one game as being fundamentally better.

====================
Runescape vs. WoW - List of criteria that demonstrates which game is better
====================

1. World PvP + Safe PvP

Your main point here is that like most MMORPG games, RS incurs high death penalty costs while WoW does not. I actually see this as a highlight point, since the reason WoW implemented this additions was to make the pauses between battles more brief. Having high death penalty costs in the back of your mind limits your desire to explore dangerous regions or undertake challenging quests - not to mention it bars you from joining a battle as quickly as you would wish to. The point of having a high death penalty cost is obviously to add more risk and thus challenge/fun to situations, but WoW accounts for this by the sheer complexity and teamwork many quests command -- if you screw up and die in important quest, you may have doomed the rest of your team and thus force you all to try again, which can take awhile.

2. Cost (Expansion prices, Subscriptions, etc.)

While I do agree that WoW is much more expensive, it accounts for this in sheer amounts of...fun. For any argument about price to be effective, it has to demonstrate that the cost of money is worst than the benefit the game brings. So how does WoW fare? Oh, just by being the most subscribed MMORPG ever - which gave it a Guiness World Record[1]. As for the disk space, again this is just a matter of money.

3. Class and Skill limitations

Yes, RS allows you to have access to all abilities while in WoW depending on your character your a privy to only a select group. However, the fact that utilizing a specific character demands a certain amount of skill after you max out your level (or rather, ESPECIALLY after you do) means there is a much richer experience of gameplay. You don't win in a fight because you had more time to burn, but because you refined your skills better. Indeed, the way WoW has constructed their classes eliminates "class envy" because how they have balanced it works out perfectly (escept in PvP matches obviously).

4. Serve limitations and Factions

The divisions among factions and servers makes it a much more interesting game play because you can encounter a race at which you are faced at odds with. It brings in competition and inevitably rivalry. If you want to mingle with a friend, you can always just ask them via an alternative manner - otherwise, befriending your fellow race members not only makes the game play feel more realistic but it still allows you to connect with the community.

5. Challenge of the game

This is actually the biggest flaw of RuneScape...THERE IS ALMOST NO SKILL TO IT. Putting effort and time into RS is the same as burning time, since the majority of actions in the game is repetitive and monotonous (such as mining). WoW, on the other hand, has much skill to it. You complain that max leveling can be done in only a couple of days, and indeed it can. But there is MUCH MORE to the game after maxing out; indeed this is why many long-time players say the game really starts after you max out your level. This is when your skill as an individual player and as a team player is crucial in situations involving quests.

It is this concept of refining one's skill that makes almost most popular games appealing. Take Halo 3, or for that fact any FPS game that has become famous. In Halo 3, which is MLG's biggest game, it is undoubtedly all about skill. Players have the same armor and damage (depending on the weapon), similar to having many players max out in WoW. When you reach the point of having to rely on skill instead of time, it's what makes the game truly challenging akin to real life situations such as sport.

6. Loot system

While you may have some personal issues against it, and indeed perhaps many people do, it's not a significant flaw in WoW as to devalue it below RS - given that RS has barely any skill to it.

7. Groups

The idea of needing a group is VERY appealing and important. It incorporates team work, which not only is featured in most sports but helps build a community for your online experience. Not only that, but it then forces one to have good teamwork, which is another important skill -- almost if not equal to individual skill. This makes the game more challenging and thus more fun.

====================
A few other remarks on why WoW is fundamentally better
====================

There are several important aesthetic keys about WoW that my opponent either forgets or ignores. While he may scoff at the point about graphics being overabused, it is a fact that WoW's gameplay experience - both visual and auditory - is unprecedent. Despite it's heavy file size, it's a very elegant and intuitive game. In fact, there isn't any bulky tutorial in the beginning, just starter tips (which is why it's so easy to pick up and play).

Furthermore, it takes away one of the most common deathtraps of MMORPG - repetitive game play. In fact, Runescape is absolutely famous for this flaw (including Maplestory, yuck). Often you are doing the same pattern of actions over and over without much, if any, skill. It's simply time and patience. WoW, on the other hand, often throws a variety of situations that keeps you on your feet and assures that to excel in the game you need SKILL[2].

====================
Conclusion
====================

Let me ask you a simple question: do you see tournaments around for Runescape? No. This is because to be a top player in Runescape takes relatively NO SKILL, JUST TIME TO WASTE. Most skills are just various ways to crunch time - indeed, a large part of the Runescape strategy is simply to find better ways to level up. Even though the fighting aspect of Runescape does take some management skill, it is nowhere as close to the intricacy of WoW fights.

I'm not putting down Runescape - it's a great game and I used to play it a lot when I was younger (hell I passed level 120 before I quit). Similarly, I used to play WoW and I agree it's much easier to level up. However, this is when most long-time WoW players say the real game starts...AFTER you get max level. This is when skill, teamwork, and such come into play.

But really, stop playing both these games and join me in Halo 3 ;).

---References---
1. http://books.google.com...
2. http://www.gamespot.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Vegeta

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent "TheSkeptic" for accepting my challenge and for making perfectly valid points in this debate. My opponent appears to be level-headed, calm, and has based his argument on sound reason and logic, one that I hope to aspire too as well.

First I will list my remaining arguments that did not fit in the first round and then I will begin to refute/comment on my opponent's points.

----------
World PvP + Safe PvP : I see you are making the argument that by not having a high death risk people are able to basically "Jump back into the action" quicker. However, I argue that that is exactly the problem. WoW has such a low death penalty (even lower in PvP) that if you kill someone they just run back and keep attacking you until you die, I argue there is little value in raiding Tarren Mill if both sides do not have a heavy penalty, as then it just becomes a game of who gets tired first. I mean how annoying is it to have a 4 minute fight with someone near your level in an semi-epic battle, to kill him, and because it is near his graveyard, he resurrects near you and finishes you off? I can understand not wanting to wait forever to re-join the action, but things like that should be limited to safe mini-games for exactly that reason. Let BG's be the only game for low-penalty death. After all, how much value would Arena's have if the players could just keep resurrecting and fighting until one side just tires of it?

PvE: It lowers the standard of creative thinking when you are in an instance and people just stand their and say "Wipe", because they know they will just have to run back or "wait" for a resurrection. I understand it is a game, but there should be more of a challenge. Your group should be doing EVERYTHING possible not to die, if it becomes apparent that you will not survive oncoming wave, or that someone made a mistake and pulled the wrong mob, mages, etc. should be frost nova-in and blinking in an attempt to slow down the attackers to buy time for the group to ESCAPE.

*Note: Because the way the loot system works, I wouldn't suggest people losing their gear currently as that would be a huge pain, especially considering how the game is entirely gear dependent and the loot system is entirely luck-dependent.

Cost: Well there is little to debate about cost, as facts are facts. There are no startup costs for RuneScape (other than subscription), and plethora of fees, startup-costs, expansions, for WoW ontop of the subscription and/or services you may want to use later (Realm Transfer, which is $25 per character). I do give it to you that WoW did make it in the Guiness Book of World Records, but then again I wouldn't expect anything less, psychology shows that people flock to things that garner their attention and that are easy, most people do not want to put a lot of effort into something they don't have to, especially entertainment. To be fair, most people subscribe to their being a god (Most Christians who believe in the Christian God have not read the bible). The majority of people as a whole are uneducated, as a result I wouldn't put much faith in something simply because the masses do. Okay, I am getting off subject trying to explain that just because a lot of people subscribe to something doesn't make it true, or better. Facts are facts, and sadly which game has better fundamentals will always be an opinion :(

Class and Skill limitations : I have to disagree with you on their not being any "class envy" in WoW PvE. Naturally with any game that introduces classes there will be balance issues, I mean unless someone's character has the exact same moves and effects that his opponent has, the game will always be unequal in terms of character classes. RuneScape eliminates this by allowing everyone the ability to use every class with one character (even if they choose to use only one class, they had the option of raising and using the ability), while with WoW...you are forced to re-roll or hope that you are against an opponent who has a disadvantage to your class. You did agree however that "Class Envy" does exist in PvP, which I commend you for, and think that emphasizes my point.

Server Limitations and Factions: I can see your point on factions (although I do not agree), but I can't see the point of server limitations, all servers should be interconnected and everyone should be able to switch servers to play with friends (even if they still have to be the same faction) at any given time, otherwise without enough money sinks, you forced to periodically server hop to avoid inflation of a particular server, if the economy was interconnected you would have a more balanced economy and if the economy were to slowly become overinflated, therein lies the problem, not enough money sinks to balance out the influx of money. While I wouldn't say RuneScape's economy is perfect, for years it has managed, and is nothing like the more populated (and locked) servers. Limited money-sinks doom the economy. Ironically a contributer to the problem is low-death penalties, the ease of the game is it's economic downfall, after all you don't have to really risk much of anything to try to gain the most expensive things/mats in game..least compared to RS where you can face losing everything on you at times.

Challenge of the Game: I see your point about their being more once you reach Max Level in WoW, however I see that is part of the problem. The levels in WoW are so easy to obtain that their shouldn't be levels anyway, I mean Blizzard keeps undercutting previous efforts you put into leveling to make it even easier for the new people who play. If the point of WoW is the stuff you do after you level up, why not eliminate the false sense of achievement of leveling to begin with? Instead Blizzard makes you go through the small tedium of leveling up (with EACH character doing nearly the SAME things, thus making you subscribe longer). The challenge of the game after leveling isn't so much based on skill from my experience as it is...gear (from lucky drops) or (finding people who know how to play) for the group quests, raids, events afterwards. When you are awarded no XP for any kills once you reach max level, it leaves you feeling that time is virtually wasted if you fail at whatever event, inevitably making some players more "serious" taking it personal if a particular goal isn't accomplished as they can no longer say "Well, at least I got XP".

From the RS standpoint, the challenge of the game is related to Risk Versus Reward, and the fact that your level means something. Even if you don't get the drop/loot you want while risking all your gear, you can earn enough from fighting the Boss NPC to eventually purchase it. While some bosses require the use of switching gear (based on the triangle), alternating prayers, or a combination of the right equipment to maximize the effectiveness of the boss fight, I won't say that RS fights are more interactive then Warcraft's, however I will challenge that Warcraft's isn't that complex in itself either. (Well for the DPS classes) as if you are a hunter you are just alternating the stings (effectively pressing the same few buttons over and over) mages alternate the spells depending on the spec they are, but still pressing the same few buttons over and over. What it comes down too is effort versus reward and I believe that RuneScape does a better job of rewarding your effort as you can always gain XP, there is always some adrenaline involved as you DO NOT WANT TO DIE.

--Out of Space---

I couldn't put my last few responses in, and still couldn't put in my other arguments referring to Botting, Company Undercutting Achievements, Gold Selling, and the awful gear system.

Here is my old list:
http://www.angelfire.com...

I would like to thank my opponent in advance and personally would love to play Halo 3 with him, if I still had high speed :(
TheSkeptic

Con

I thank my opponent for his exhaustive response; it's clear he knows what he's talking about. As a general precursor, it seems evident to me that the bulk of my argument rests on several key aspects that WoW offers in contrast to RS - such as gameplay, aesthethics, and really just small details that make a surprising impact on it's overall quality. Furthermore, since he hasn't touched my claim about the philosophical fuzziness of the resolution, I will have to assume that he agrees with me. He also ignores my point about the aesthetics of the game, which I will reinforce in the conclusion of my argument; such seemingly minor aspects can remarkably make a game much more enjoyable and thus fundamentally better.

====================
Runescape vs. WoW - List of criteria that demonstrates which game is better
====================

1. World PvP + Safe PvP + PvE

Sure, you may list some places in which this death penalty (or lack thereof) may be a nuisance given your goals; this kind of consequence is pretty much unavoidable for most aspects in most games in most genres across the board, especially when you are dealing with a MMORPG. However, in most cases this unique death penalty serves it's purpose in making the transition much more smoother (between death and coming back) and for facilitating the player's need, though this usually applies in PvE situations. I do agree that WoW's PvP needs some work and indeed there are things such as a honor system that will serve as another source of motivation.

Furthermore, many quests or dungeons in which a group of members must fight a high-level boss will weigh importance on you staying alive given the fact that if you die, it makes it only so much easier for the rest of your team to die (and that there is no graveyard 10 steps away). In the end, though, WoW is first and foremost a PvE game - though there is MUCH potential in it's PvP, which makes it all the more exciting.

2. Cost

The difference when contemplating what the majority want in terms of entertainment is that since it's basically a matter of taste and how "fun" it is, you do have to consider the fact that a considerably large amount of people find WoW fun even though it has some costs. I'd wager these costs are worth it most of the time because even though the expansions themselves cost money they are some jam-packed with new game play experience it's almost deserving. RS, on the other hand, barely makes any innovation. Sure, they come out with a lot of new updates but many of these updates comprise of the same fundamental cycle of monotonous button-mashing.

3. Class and Skill limitations

I'm not saying there is NO class envy whatsoever, for that would be absurd. I am saying that it's much less noticeable than many other MMORPG, which is a feat in itself. Most of the characters have their important role in a group of players (which inevitably you will find yourself in later on in the game given the nature of quests and raids), so you won't feel like you've chosen the wrong character type.

4. Server Limitations and Factions

The point in having separate servers is not only for economic reasons, but for other pragmatic ones (such as having dense overpopulation). In fact, RS has servers as well so the same criticism could be applied to you. In WoW, there are realms that can be made for a specific target group making interests more prioritized and thus better received.

5. Challenge of the game

The erase any conception of levels is somewhat absurd - sure, you can level up really fast but even that process itself is pretty harsh and not for the casual gamer. What's important is the choices you make ALONG THE WAY of leveling up, such as what skills you want to focus specializing in and what not. Plus, the gradual progression to getting into harder territory is part of most, if not all, MMORPG games.

In RS, it faces much more severe problems. Firstly, you are taking a myopic response to this problem - fighting isn't the main goal of RS. Indeed, there are so many other skills that you can develop that all inevitably fall into a monotonous pattern. And yes, there is the danger of dropping your items but you could always carry a minimum of items to save them either way (unless you're facing a creature which demands a full set). And yet, even at that point there isn't much skill but rather how much time you put into raising your levels, your team size, some modicum of skill, and luck. At least in WoW there is a much more intricate and frankly fun teamwork at hand.

====================
Conclusion
====================

As noted in my previous round, the aesthetics of WoW are impeccable when put in comparison to RS. The music is ambient and very befitting, while the graphical design is breathtaking - there is also the impressive accomplishment of the different terrains somehow comfortably connection together to create the world of Azeroth.

A great note is that WoW is able to make each battle FUN, and to leave you from each encounter at least somewhat satisfied (I remember dying in RS and losing most of what I had...man I felt like crap). This can only be done with a mixture of it's aesthetics and game experiences.

RS is very monotonous and takes barely any skill.
Debate Round No. 2
Vegeta

Pro

Ah, the final round. I once again would like to thank my opponent for responding and addressing my points made in the previous round. Although I respectively disagree with many of his points.

Since I defended my stance on the issues in round 1 and 2 and believe my arguments still hold up, I will make a few final points.

I still argue that RuneScape is fundamentally better than World of Warcraft, I understand WoW has RS in graphics, there is no argument there, but I am talking about integrity, and time invested as well, especially for your money. I'm sure many people play WoW, just like many play RuneScape. RuneScape is cheaper than WoW, but I don't believe that is why it is the sole reason why it is better, as people are willing to spend money on things (especially if they are addicted to it) regardless of a price hike as long as they can afford it. I view WoW as a "shiny" object that some find it hard to take their eyes off of to see the truth of it's mechanics.

Final Points:

Gear:

RS: The game isn't gear dependent, gear is a plus and increases your defense, attack, and sometimes gives you a small special ability, however gear only amplifies your effectiveness by about 10-15%. A higher level increases your effectiveness naturally by a good bit, however you aren't guaranteed to win no matter how high your level is. An opponent within 15 stat level difference, can still take you down, strategy plays a role in fights, as you should use their weakness against them, based on their gear, combat triangle, and type of weapon. Levels are hard to earn, yet play a large role in your effectiveness if it is dramatically higher than your opponent, yet the stats give little benefit in increments of one, a Level 3 can still kill a level 138 physically, but highly improbable.

WoW: Levels matter significantly in WoW, despite how easy it is to obtain them, however even more then that. GEAR matters. Gear can effectively multiply the power any character has by 3 if done right. The game IS gear dependent, which is GROUP dependent. Also, a Level 1 CANNOT defeat a Level 30+, because Blizzard made it so that you can pretty much resist every attack after certain level difference. There is no fairness without at least giving people a chance, if you have better gear and levels you should have an advantage, but shouldn't be so unfair that if a character walks up to you, casts frostbolt on you 1,000 times that you resist every cast without even moving.

Undercutting Achievements:

RS: Jagex rarely undercut the previous achievements of previous work, improvements and updates to the game, may provide better ways to train, not change the XP rate of previous NPC's or the amount received from previous work.

WoW: Has a tradition of undercutting the efforts of previous work. They halved the XP required to reach 70 and doubled the XP NPC's give in instances and weakened all NPC's in instances below 70. Effectively more than halving the time and effort required to achieve previous goals, most of the time you are better off just waiting for them to nerf something. WoW should just remove the leveling system all together, as it is a joke merely meant to inspire you in thinking you achieved something to gain a sense of false pride.

Account Selling/Buying: (Now, I am a bit biased here, because I firmly believe in the EULA and rules you agree to when you play a game, if you break the rules you agreed to, effectively giving your word, then you out to be punished accordingly and strictly)

RS: There is a ZERO tolerance for cheating in the game. If you break the rules that you AGREED to, you will be banned, RS constantly searches and bans account sellers and traders, and has a recored for being harder on rule breakers compared to most games as they are more concerned about the legitimacy of their game than easy revenue, Jagex has a philosophy that if a game is more legitimate that people won't feel they have wasted their time, or feel like account buyers are undercutting their achievements. Jagex also prosecutes more serious offenders.

Source: http://www.casualgaming.biz...

WoW: They do ban accounts that account sell and trade, but not often as Jagex. This isn't a biased assumption you can look at WoW reports, take a trip to Ebay, look at the hundreds of WoW account selling sites, or ...log into WoW and talk to guildies, visit Org (Horde Side) and look at the accounts spamming gold-selling sites. Once you play WoW long enough, you can spot them easy, they are the level 80's that can't find Outlands, or don't know how to do an instance. Even if you do get banned, you can appeal and more than likely be re-instated with a convincing enough story. (Granted some bans, such as macroing, tend to be permanent).

However in comparison, Trial Accounts have restrictions on spamming capabilities, yet still manage to do it (even if they do it with dead bodies, or eventually subscribing). RuneScape has F2P (where it is essentially free to make more accounts to spam) yet Jagex does a better job of controlling them. Both games have anti-macro systems in place which auto-ban certain macros, yet I see and know people who continually buy gold for real life money and have done so for over 3 years. (Yes, I am ashamed I know this guy personally, he was even banned once, called Blizzard, gave them a sob story, and had his account unfrozen later that evening). My best friend played WoW, gave his account and password to someone online (yes, breaking the rules and stupid) contacted WoW and they reimbursed his items (2x) he had lost from being "hacked". However, some of the hacked items were BoP blues and purples, so he just sharded the extra and sold it for profit (from breaking the rules in the first place?) Again, this is just two incidents from people I know personally and have seen. Let's not get started on hearsay from college peers.

RuneScape however does have permanent bans and mutes, this would never happen in RS.

Botting (Kinda addressed it above):

RS: It is near impossible to bot in RS and not get caught, Jagex has updated their anti-macro software yet again, and as someone who has seen behind the scenes things in Jagex, they ban thousands accounts for botting, which isn't easy, considering the fact they offer F2P as it is.

WoW: Hunter bots are everywhere, because Hunters are an easy class to play. You can find them on any server that has a lot of high quality fur that they can skin. I've reported a bot, and seen them again 3 months later, they are almost never banned. Reason? Because as long as someone is paying the $15 a month...why would Blizzard ban them? If they ban a hundred bots, they just lost $1,500 revenue per month.
--
Jagex also updates RuneScape every week and ADDS content at no additional cost (or expansion). Completing quest increase access to new areas, new abilities, new advantages, and unlike WoW, you only ever need to do a quest ONCE, never have to re-roll and do it again for the 6th time. RuneScape does have deeper lore than World of Warcraft (and I have played the RTS games).

Jagex has pretty much eliminated Gold Selling from their game (including F2P!), in WoW you go to a major city like Org. and find the latest gold spammer to buy gold from. There are plenty of people who obviously break the rules, or buy gold and they go unpunished. Blizzard themselves have stated on forums that they considered selling gold for money as they could undercut 3rd party sites and profit off it it. Things like that shouldn't even be considered, real-life financial situations shouldn't play a direct role in how successful you are in a game, you shouldn't be able to just "buy" accounts, or wealth.

Everything in life takes time. Work, College, Games, etc. If you are playing games, then you have time, the question is if you know how to make the most efficient use of your time in a game. As you can't play WoW or RS
TheSkeptic

Con

I thank my opponent for this interesting debate; I've never debated on a topic like his so I'd figure I would try it at least once. I will note that he has not responded to my rebuttals in the second round, and while he states he feels confident enough that they can hold up by themselves, this is ultiamtely for the voters to decide. Nontheless, I will fancy his new points. His in-depth knowledge of the game is praiseworthy and definitely adequate for sustaining this debate, but I fear he overlooks to much of the aspects of WoW in favor of RS, even when the answer seems to be so evident.

=====================
Comparison between RS and WoW
=====================

1. Gear + Levels

To an extent, gear does affect your performance in RS - there is no doubt about that. And I agree, WoW is heavily centered on gear...but isn't that what makes it better? Because if you agree that gear for RS isn't as important than WoW, than what do you expect as a RS player when you reach the higher levels and fight others? At the end of the day, having a 99 in skill X would be equally effective to someone else who has a 99 in skill X as well. If both players devote sufficient time to hit a certain level, then most of the skill is abandoned since there is BARELY any strategy in RS fights.

I agree that there is weaknesses and strengths, exemplified in the "triangle". However, what you fail to notice is that not only is this actualized in WoW as well, but RS has a much more simpler version of it; Wow allows for much more possibilities and thus challenge. The accompaniment of gear means that even if everyone is maxed out, their hard work at trying to getting a rare item would pay off.

You also bring up the issue of levels, and I agree that after a certain difference even gear would be highly ineffective. But this poses no problem, since the point for most players in the beginning IS TO LEVEL UP. As I said before, the game truly begins after you hit the maximum level; the journey of levelling up is in kind of like a long, luscious, training session :D

2. Undercutting achievements

The change probably signifies that WoW has reassed the difficulty configuration for certain skills, activities, etc. This isn't something that happens only to WoW - it happens in every game. Even in RS, you will find the update here and there that notifies a change in something that has been instated for a long time but has now changed. I don't really see how this is much of a criticism besides someone say "ahh, I wish that happened sooner".
3. Account selling/buying + boting

I agree that this is a problem that plagues every game, and Jagex is admirable for being hard on cheaters. However, I still don't see how this is a major implement in the game since it isn't the case in which every raid or half your encounter with other players consists of bought accounts, or people using cheating software.

=====================
Conclusion
=====================

My opponent garners many points against WoW, but most of them are either minor, or can be used against him. Ultimately though, both these games aren't very appealing for me, so oh well :D. It was an interesting debate, and I hope we have more in the future.
Debate Round No. 3
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by JohnGotti 7 years ago
JohnGotti
i think interconnected servers is a great idea and wow should try to implicate this...if you think about it...it could easily be done and ppeople can easily server jump and what not with their guidls and stuff...ive come across the same guild in 2 different servers....combine all servers and that guild is twice as big. im sure its much much easier said than done though.

runescape....the problem is theres no customization....what you do is what you get...for example..once you reach the level max for woodcutting. YAY! youve joined the otheer million subscribers to runescape.... oh.... cool... no RPG elements.
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
lol Vegeta, you really thought you could win this?
Posted by Sylux 7 years ago
Sylux
Runescape has gone downhill.
Though I've never played WoW, it is to my understanding that it is so awesome that they have TWO Princes of Darkness, Night-Elf Mohawks, and at least chicken.
Posted by BewareItsAndrew 7 years ago
BewareItsAndrew
Interesting debate... Very fun to read and think about, I am an avid runescape player and this debate really did make me think.
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
go runescape!
Posted by TheSkeptic 7 years ago
TheSkeptic
Thanks sherlock, very honest of you!
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
Can I get rid of bias, here? Hmmm, skeptic is a great debater and could have made a case for RS as well as WoW, but I run a guild in WoW and I agree that getting to the max level is somewhat simple, if that is all you want to do, but then what? I have leveled more as a level 80 in WoW than before I hit it. Hit Caps, Def Rating, Crit, Expertise cap, enchants for gear, faction, gemming, raid gear... it is tough and RS does not allow for us to do these things. WoW blows RS out of the water for fun, cool stuff. (btw anyone that likes a guild that raids one night a week and any other time is your own...send me a tell). I will hold off on an RFD because I support skeptic's side too much, but he could reverse rolls and do just as well. Sorry guys, no vote from me until I make sure it is honest.
Posted by TheSkeptic 7 years ago
TheSkeptic
PRO got 6 points then 7 points? I beg of you, anonymous voter, how at the very least did he beat me in spelling and in reliable sources?
Posted by EHS_Debate 7 years ago
EHS_Debate
I love my sniper. Awkward... I know. I play halo 3 also. And I agree with your Runescape over WoW decision.
Posted by Sylux 7 years ago
Sylux
Hahaha yeah. I can't fight long range for shnizlle, though.
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Sick 6 years ago
Sick
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Pyromaniac 7 years ago
Pyromaniac
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by kingofslash5 7 years ago
kingofslash5
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by JohnGotti 7 years ago
JohnGotti
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by freakwars 7 years ago
freakwars
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Alex 7 years ago
Alex
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by BewareItsAndrew 7 years ago
BewareItsAndrew
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
VegetaTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30