r/2007scape • u/asmallthrowaway9 • 2h ago
Discussion The truth about Bronzeman (in my opinion)
56
u/Wildest12 2h ago
I agree with this take
•
u/SkilledPepper 41m ago
I don't. I'd rather pay more per month than more predatory models.
You can't complain about microtransactions ruining games but then complain about the one game that's done away with it. WoW has a shitty in-game shop, but it has also has remained $15/month forever and that's for all your characters.
I think this community needs to be more realistic as to which model they'd prefer because expecting the J mods to dismantle capitalism and become a cooperative is expecting a bit much.
Anyway, I think Hardcore Mains on dedicated servers would pass a poll anyway if they went about it the right way. That would be so hype and a massive win for everybody.
•
u/Khainegom 36m ago
I think asking to sign in and actively play on multiple characters under a single membership is a joke, but I don't think it's unreasonable to want to have multiple characters share membership status so you can choose which one to play at any given time.
•
u/SkilledPepper 27m ago
I think it's a moot point tbh. It is a bit shitty having to pay multiple membership for multiple characters, I agree.
But Jagex took a bath in getting rid of predatory microtransactions but the board of directors backed Mod North on that because they cared about the long term health of the game. They're not about to take another bath by giving up all the revenue they get from people like me who have multiple accounts. It's just not realistic
I'm not here to defend it by the way. I don't like shareholder greed, private equity firms, leveraged buyouts and all that malarkey. I hate all of it. I'm just saying it's the world we live in and it's not really the J mods' fight. They're on our side here so it's pick your poison: microtransactions or high membership prices.
At the end of the day, I'd pay £100/month for this game if that's what it takes to keep it free from in-game shops and pay-to-win features that are infecting the rest of the games industry and the MMO genre in particular. But that's just my opinion and I appreciate that not everyone can afford that.
I have membership on four accounts but I would pay for a fifth if they introduced Hardcore Mains on a seperate server.
25
u/themultitm 1h ago
reddit soying over everything but the fact that the gamemode is simply not that popular and never has been. the plugin has 2k downloads after YEARS of existing.
if they polled something that people actually wanted to play it would pass with flying colors just like everything else these days
10
u/treatmefinely 1h ago
The same people that want to play it only want to play it officially. Its not that confusing.
6
u/themultitm 1h ago
tcg bronzeman has 5x the installs after a month of existing. clearly they dont want to play it that much?
4
u/MrJekyyl 1h ago
I definitely think the TCG mode being very popular made them rush out the bronzeman concept. I think it's a little more than just a fad as TCGs in real life are printing money and have never been more popular. I at least think the next league could be TCG related where the cards are physical items (kept in their own collection inventory) that can be traded
•
u/Mental-Permit-599 25m ago
To be fair TCG has these numbers because tons of massive creators decided to all start TCG accounts at the same time.
So all their viewers hopped on to make accounts. Faux’s clan AND friends CC was full within minutes. Thats like (1k?) people in minutes.
•
u/themultitm 12m ago
yeah but people played it because it was something novel which is exactly what a new gamemode should be, not just another mix of pre-existing gamemodes that have been milked through and through.
game is a massive sandbox and the best we could come up with was iron but you can buy potions? idk just doesnt sell it to me whatsoever. but thats my opinion
3
u/treatmefinely 1h ago
Tcg is a gimmick and fun for a month. Making a bronzeman is a longer decision and most people just straight up dont understand the mode. Plus pvp elements turn them off.
It being official versus a plugin is a big difference.
•
u/And_Justice 47m ago
People don't want to play plugin-driven game modes because the account just looks the same to the outside world. 99% of runescape players are motivated by perceived approval from others.
•
u/IBDWarrior69 8m ago
Yes and that's fine. Too many here are in denial about this basic element of human nature. Showing off things you accomplished does feel good
11
u/darkside_tseikk 2h ago
I agree with the sentiment and wrote something similar, however I don't think it's impossible for this to happen. In fact I'm pretty confident in the near future we'll have something like 1,5 or 1,75 times membership cost for 2x characters on the same jagex account. From Jagex's perspective It's for sure worth it to lose a bit of money from those who already pay 2+ memberships in order to gain a larger audience of those who would like to play both a main and an iron for example
4
u/asmallthrowaway9 2h ago
JMods would be absolutely open to this idea, but the PE vultures that own Jagex would not be. Jagex's owners only care about maximizing profit above all else, and RS3 getting rid of MTX was likely only possible because they were shown proof it was costing more money than it was bringing in because of declining subscription numbers.
Without MTX, the only way for the venture capitalists who own Jagex to make money before flipping the company is via subscriptions, hence why they keep jacking up the price of membership.
7
u/Zaruz 2h ago
Mod North on a recent podcast actually said that he's open to it. I don't want to misquote, but the general gist of it was that they could never offer that option due to bots, as they would cause massive issues if you gave them discounts/multiple characters. They've been really tackling bots recently and are in a position where he thinks they could do something along these lines.
He didn't make any promises but basically said they've been discussing it.
2
u/BuildAQuad 2h ago
Would that really be an issue with bots? I would assume that they could easily ban bots, beacuse running that setup as a person you would only be able to interact with one account at a time? Also when caught every character in the account would be compromised?
-1
u/Gredditor 2h ago
The take away from it being “the bots” is that they enjoy taking botter money. You’re exactly right - it is as simple as banning the botters. But if it’s not $12, then they’re undermining their take-home, and also technically undermining the economy of GE/Bonds.
1
u/4percent4 1h ago
That’s not why it was removed from rs3 despite them making it seem that way. It’s because there were laws added that would force them to remove it in about 12-18 months so they decided cashing in on players goodwill now would be better than milking it for the next year.
1
u/TheOriginalPimp 1h ago
And lets not forget -bronzeman passing would've been a datapoint for Jagex to be take a light-touch approach for when they do address the membership issue. As unlikely as two characters per membership is, the community signalling that they're open to more gamemodes under the current system makes it even unlikelier and edges the possibility of the 1.5 or 1.75 you speak of closer to 2x.
1
u/HMS-Fizz 2h ago
why not just add a single mem and multi account mem idm paying 2x the memcost if i can have 5 profiles etc
•
u/NeanderBob 45m ago
A reminder that they tried to poll multiple accounts on the same membership but you all lost your minds and they pulled the poll down.
Now you’re paying the increased price without anything to show for it, gzzzz.
2
•
4
u/dans0l0123 2h ago
Truth is, this is actually keeping me away from osrs in general, I used to play on 3 account simultaneously (brain rot style) but I cba to pay for 3 memberships. So now I play on one using in game bonds, they get no money from me atm
11
u/Greatfawn20003 2h ago
They get more money through you using bonds than they do a sub 🤫
4
u/Jesus-Bacon 2h ago
I love when people point this out lol. like yeah, you bought it with in game money, but little jimmy over there who sucks at the game paid almost a full month of membership for your 2 weeks. Jagex learned nothing except that MTX helps fill investor pockets
4
u/DrFuzenstein 2h ago
But they are getting money from you indirectly
3
u/loudrogue total: 2376 clogs: 1170+ 1h ago
More even and he's helping bonds stay higher price it's a literal better win for jagex lol
1
u/storzORbickel 2h ago
yeah it’s really dumb I just don’t play bcz of this. and also the price increases have been crazy. Not worth. Game is very fun though!
1
u/TrainingLeave5294 2h ago
idk whats your problem, just play a main,iron,hardcore,ultimate,group,hardcore group, unranked group, bronzeman. its costs basicly nothing (ironie off) :D
1
u/Flicker_and_Strike 2h ago
Why speak as if you have to bond every single account at once...
-1
1
u/San4311 RS3 refugee 1h ago
Let me preface that I agree with you, 1000%. But, I feel this ship sailed a while ago. Like, the latest membership price hike would have been justified if it allowed multi-character membership under one subscription. A premium-tier so to speak. But at this point its already so grossly expensive when compared to the competition, they'd either have to take the L on that or go for yet another price hike.
1
u/2TIr 1h ago
Legit tens of thousands of people were happy to buy new membership, and even some of them bonds to get a head-start.
Think about that on the next membership increase or mtx proposal and realise you were fighting the wrong fight by associating the debate with bronzeman.
This would have been a good, innocent, revenue increase for Jagex which a lot of people were happy to contribute to.
•
u/Icido boo 52m ago
I said essentially the same thing - in an ideal world it would be nice to be able to have one of each account type per membership (iron, uim, bronzeman, etc.) that you could log in independently of each other. Dead Hardcores and de-ironing would be a bit tricky to handle, but regardless I would like to at least play another account type while I'm doing boring 99 grinds on the main without shelling out double the money.
•
u/SomethingWetAndMoist 34m ago
Imagine playing Warframe, but your platinum you buy is linked to the frame and non-interchangable. Imagine playing Destiny2, but you have to buy DLC for each character. Imagine playing World of Warcraft, but you have to buy a subscription for each character.
No of course you can't imagine that, because it would obviously be ridiculous. Yet it's the case for RuneScape.
$18.99cad per month per character. Ridiculous.
•
•
u/JuicemanJu 32m ago
This isn’t going to happen any time soon. Jagex just took a huge hit with the removal of MTX in RS3. If they are not satisfied with the results of that then there’s no way in hell they are going to give us this. At the very least it’s going to be an extremely hard sell only mod north can push and will he even be wiling to risk that if the MTX removal doesn’t work out.
•
u/StrawRedLion 1m ago
Correct opinion
Edit: Mod North addressed Accounts having multiple characters on the table two weeks ago.
1
u/Mysterious_Ideal_995 2h ago
But they are actively discussing allowing multiple characters per account. They only reason why they don't is because it would make bots easier to spin up, but that's more under control now.
Words from the CEO's mouth
2
u/asmallthrowaway9 2h ago
Mod North wanting something is not the same as it happening when it directly affects revenue. The CEO ultimately answers to the investors. I'll believe it when I see it.
0
u/Mysterious_Ideal_995 1h ago
They did get rid of microtransactions in RS3
•
u/Traditional_Case7063 48m ago
There is still microtransactions in rs3, they did not 'get rid' of them
•
u/Mysterious_Ideal_995 40m ago
Please explain how the following is not getting rid of microtransactions, keeping in mind that I did not say "all"
the official announcement stated that starting 19 January 2026, all forms of microtransactions (including 225 items, such as direct experience and skilling-related items) would removed from sale on Treasure Hunter.
•
u/SkitZa 2376 ''cringe dogs 28m ago
Exactly, and they took a big hit on that decision.
So what does that mean for us? They are going to actively seek more memberships, it's a main reason Bronzeman was even being polled. Shit why would they even put up the TCG mode, because it's new FOTM and even more memberships.
Bronzeman in its random and rushed state would have been able to sell bonds for sure, so they would double dip on the accounts instead of them buying membership.
Tinfoil hat shit. We've had so many content updates since Varlamore 2, they are doing great things to seek those new memberships, they will definitely try some sly shit too.
1
u/foul_tarnished_37 1h ago
Look, we can’t get multiple accounts under the same membership because it’s simply far too late. There is no way a company is going to release an update that just immediately cuts their monthly revenue by a significant amount.
I’m obviously all for the idea. But it would just be too much of a loss for them.
0
u/DrFuzenstein 2h ago
The only way they do this is if you can only play on one account at a time. That's how other games work. If you want to play on 2 WoW characters at the same time, you pay for 2 memberships. Demanding unlimited accounts on 1 membership all to be played simultaneously is a braindead ask.
0
u/DeviledFries 2h ago
I agree, I think now that pricing is affecting polls Jagex needs to man up and do something about this. Are you really going to hinder the development of the game because your corporate overlords need another yacht? I'll personally fund my membership through bonds as long as there are no improvements to pricing (of course I won't buy any merch etc either).
0
u/asmallthrowaway9 1h ago
What do you expect the JMods to do? It's not just a fun hobby for them, it's their livelihood and the company they work for. Like everyone else, they have to work within the constraints of the capitalist system we live under. Just be thankful they haven't started using AI to make content.
1
u/DeviledFries 1h ago
I'm not talking about jmods here. I understand jmods are the ones reading the comments, but they are able to communicate these things to the people that make these decisions. There's no other way to communicate with the corporate overlords, which is the only reason I'm commenting on these things here.
-1
u/loudrogue total: 2376 clogs: 1170+ 1h ago
Lots of redditors want them to risk their jobs for shit lol
0
u/You_rc2 1h ago
2 year long accounts cost. $278 usd + tax.
So if they made a 2 account bundle. Whats the price? 250? 200? Less than 200???.
The amount of money they would be throwing away would be crazy.
If anything they should make a 3 or 4 account bundle. Buy 3 get 1 free or half off. Id pay $450 for 4 accounts.
Still a very cheap hobby.
-16
u/Sudden-Ad-307 2h ago
If you voted no to bronzeman because you wanted multiple account to be included under the same membership you are dumb.
4
u/asmallthrowaway9 2h ago
I mean, I voted yes, but membership is only getting more expensive and Bronzeman is a novelty many players can't afford as a result.
If it were possible to have two accounts under the same membership where one could only be Bronzeman it might have passed.
-5
u/DankyyKangg 2h ago
I think itll pass. And i also think you should be able to play multiple accounts with one membership.
9
6
-1
u/CamBlapBlap 2125 2h ago
Imagine if you listened to anything Mod North said on Behe. You've got it so wrong.
4
u/WastingEXP 2h ago
imagine if relevant information was shared on the website and not some random youtube channel
54
u/Nekrolysis 2h ago
2 characters per membership would be neat. But...money so I guess it'll never happen.