From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > DarkScape
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 24 September 2015 by Liquidhelium.

I received the following via an email from fansite support:


As a valued Fansite, we’d like you to join us in celebrating the launch of DarkScape – our all-new, experimental PvP sandbox game.

In DarkScape, we’ve taken 14 years of RuneScape content and thrown it into chaos. Everyone starts fresh, and we’ve allowed Wilderness-rules PvP anywhere, split the world into risk regions with separate economies – meaning lucrative merchanting opportunities – and more.

We’ve released this with no forewarning so we can see what the community do with it completely fresh. This is a rare opportunity to get stuck into something completely new, and we think it’ll make great fansite material.

Please do check out the DarkScape website and give it a go – you can log in with your RuneScape account, and you’ll get a handy progression boost if you’re already a RuneScape member.

If you decide to include DarkScape on your fansite, please do let us know at [email protected] We’ll be glad to promote your content on our social channels.

We’ve attached an asset pack that you may find useful!

Mod MattHe Community Manager – RuneScape Jagex Games Studio

Essentially, Jagex are asking if we'd like to include content from DarkScape in this wiki, so I thought I'd make this to discuss it as a community. cqm 11:20, 16 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

Oh and the "asset pack" is 3 bits of concept art that look like recently released art work that's been edited and added to. Nothing major :/ cqm 11:59, 16 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)


Comment - My opinion is to keep it on here for now, until we see how it diverges from RS3. If it gets too far from RS3, treat it like OSRS and Classic. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 11:36, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely not - Especially because of things like:

  • Gear above level 75 requirement gives greatly reduced stat returns, compared to RuneScape.
  • Each of the three regions has its own, separate Grand Exchange and Bank – with greatly limited space.

It's clear that from the very start things are going to be very different from the main game. One of the biggest problem is that PvP is not very popular amongst most of our regular contributors. What if this is a flop? We'd have spent so much time trying to adjust for nothing? At least for Old School we knew it was going to be popular because so many people voted just to have it open. I'm not against creating a new wiki, doing some imports, and immediately affiliating. But that's what it should be: a separate wiki.

I honestly don't see how this is any different from the Old School version. It's an older version of the game content with completely different mechanics that will be diverging off in its own direction. MolMan 13:30, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

It looks like User:Pk King X11 has already created [[w:c:darkscape|]]. He's a contributor on 2007scape and a little bit over here, and he's probably a good guy to get that wiki off to a good start. MolMan 13:35, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Keep DankScape stuff here - One page outlining the differences between the games and pages for some DankScape exclusive stuff like the guards would probably be more than enough. Everything else is pretty much the same. I don't see DankScape lasting much longer than a month anyway TBH. --Adventurer's log Wahisietel (Talk) Quest map icon.png 13:45, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - I recall that "it'll last a month" joke/arguement being used on OSR when it first came out, and look at how it's still alive and kicking to this day. :P --Jlun2 (talk) 15:46, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - I say we should have a namespace for DarkScape. Like if there are any differences about an article, maybe have a template that says something about a DarkScape version of it - this will just add the "DarkScape:" prefix to the current article name it's on - pretty straightforward. On the DarkScape namespace articles, maybe include an outline of differences aside from the live game or re-written entirely. I feel like if it's put on a separate wiki it may not get much attention. Just my thoughts. sMZBK5h.pngiisDlt8.png15:55, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Namespace is a terrible idea. We saw this with the beta. MolMan 16:25, September 16, 2015 (UTC)
*war flashbacks* Blaze_fire.png12.png 21:59, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Keep DarkScape - Parentheses exist for a reason. Seismic wand (DarkScape) should not be much of a problem. With a badge in the top-right, just like 07 pages. User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 16:06, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

That would honestly be a more confusing solution than anything else. MolMan 16:29, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - At first glance I thought that there might be so little change, that DS wouldn't be better off with its own wikia, and thus could stay all here. Looking a little closer there are more differences than I'd hoped, including armour/weapon stats, guards, interfaces, wilderness, dung etc missing, as well as future updates (however often those'll happen). A DS namespace/parentheses seems more messy than a separate wikia, so I'm eh about that (namespace>parentheses though). I also agree with the fact that it may be a flop (and thus all the work importing pages from here would be a waste of time), and that it might not get much attention if put on a separate wiki (even if it makes sense to do so).

Also thoughts on if DS was to stay on this wiki... Would there be many new pages that need made? Guards, yes. Wilderness, yes probably. Maybe not for the armour/weapon stats, interfaces and such, as those could go on the DarkScape page (e.g DS/armour subpage?). Against having all separate armour/weapon pages under a DS parentheses. Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 16:15, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Potentially yes. We'd have a couple hundred pages that would need to find a way to accommodate the different stats. Many areas would need to find a way to accommodate the new resources and banks that have been added, along with their danger rating. The entire Grand Exchange is completely different. So that's what? At least 3500 more pages to worry about just for price data. All content after May 2015 in RuneScape will not exist in DarkScape. And if it's popular enough for us to care about it, it will be getting its own content as well. No matter how you look at it, it's a completely different game. Just like Old School we should consider it not our problem. MolMan 16:25, September 16, 2015 (UTC)
We could have a single page outlining item differences, a single page outlining location differences and so on. And maybe some pages for DarkScape exclusive content (such as the guards). The problem with another wiki is that the vast majority of quests, monsters, items, ect are identical to how they are in RS3. Adventurer's log Wahisietel (Talk) Quest map icon.png 16:34, September 16, 2015 (UTC)
Having many items and quests be the same didn't really affect our decision in splitting off OSRS. Also, you're underestimating it. Every page that references an item's grand exchange price would need to accommodate. That's more items than you think, and just about every monster. The more things change, the more we'll have to work to fit both things in there. I can easily see many high level monsters getting stat changes to counteract the weapon rescaling. Experience rates too. Having legacy only also changes the strategies for many monsters, especially newer ones. These similarities definitely aren't going to stay forever. MolMan 16:39, September 16, 2015 (UTC)
From the looks of things, DS may very need its own wiki if only to keep in line with what's already in place for OSRS and Classic. I mean, different strategy guides, different GE prices, and different armour stats, among others, makes this look like it could become its own thing. Hydrokinetic (talk) 16:48, September 16, 2015 (UTC)
Ok, well I learned that the DS economy is different, so leaning even more towards separate wikia. Another thing is that differences in quests/items/monsters between OSRS and here is bigger, as completely different graphics, whereas DS is the same. DS scenery images would all be obsolete though (cus' night). If DS didn't turn out to be a flop, and received updates somewhat often, we'd ultimately just be putting off the inevitable by keeping DS pages here. But hey, can't predict the future. I'd potentially be interested in helping out with DS wikia if it became a thing. Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 16:51, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Separate - Just like OSRS and Classic, it is a different game, with different economy, different content and even different clans. The gameplay is also noticeably different on how bank and teleports work and the fact it is pvp everywhere with no gravestones.

Level 75+ items work differently, some areas are noticeably different (for example Varrock wall extends all the way to cooking guild, wilderness ditch is replaced with a impassable wall).

Also content will also diverge from the main game.

Considering the above, it makes more sense to separate things.RuneTrackMr G W Talk HSAdventurer's log 16:50, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Seperate - It is a different game in which stats are different for certain items. Different prices and different rules and tactics. I would imagine not risking the same gear as we do in boss fights in Runescape 3 if they risk losing it all. Parenthesis is not an real option unless we want to end up with pages like: Giant skeleton (Tarns lazor) (DarkScape) and namespaces tend to not be included in the search results. As of how it is currently we still have a few pages that pop up with really outdated content information (pre-eoc) and this would only make the wiki even more clouded with extra information on stuff which will not affect the majority of the players. Fearthe1337 (talk) 16:55, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Seperate - Unless the "everywhere pvp" or "darkscape mode" gets added to the main game, it should be seperate. A mention of Darkscape should exist as an article, much like OSRS, RSC have (or mentioned in the history of runescape game). But there are already difference between the 2 games (3 GE's, no content after May 2015, no Dungeoneering, etc) that it really is its own content. They could copy and paste a lot of RS Wikia pages into Darkscape Wikia and save some work. --Deltaslug (talk) 17:31, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Question- Isn't there already precedence based on the OSRS wiki content? --Deltaslug (talk) 17:33, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - If DankScape is a replica of RuneScape, wouldn't it be better if we asked Staff to copy this wiki to DankSpace Wiki, and change the information instead? Would be pretty easier than importing all the stuff. — Jr Mime (talk) [VSTF] 22:03, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - If it splits, should the forums there be named Dead tree grove or Bloodwood grove? --Jlun2 (talk) 23:58, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Wow you're so god damn funny I pissed myself. Thanks!!! MolMan 00:00, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

Separate - After seeing what's already been started up over at [[w:c:darkscape|the DarkScape wiki]], I say we separate the two wikis. Importing pages should not be hard, and perhaps a top-right link could also be implemented like currently with the 07scape wiki. User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 00:17, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

Separate - Just like "Old School" is a different game, so is Darkscape. --Saftzie (talk) 00:25, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

Separate - It's only going to deviate more anyway. Temujin 08:43, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

Separate - I say we follow the OSRS content precedence. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 13:59, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - I say for now list the differences between RuneScape and DarkScape in the DarkScape article and its subpages. Perhaps a separate wiki won't be needed any time soon. If it gets flooded with new content and mechanics, split. 5-x Talk 18:02, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

It has no subpages, and honestly shouldn't get any. How do you plan to accommodate the 3500 price differences on what? at least 10000 pages? The differences are not as small as you'd like to think they are. MolMan 18:10, September 17, 2015 (UTC)
The point is, my idea was to not record this information at all, just describe the main differences. Also, don't forget that the three Grand Exchanges within DarkScape are all disjoint. Obviously, if a full level of detail is something people want, then there's no other option than to start a new wiki. I'd still say that's a waste of time and editor power... 5-x Talk 18:19, September 17, 2015 (UTC)
No one has to edit the new wiki if they don't want to. The idea is to create the wiki in the first place so that anyone who does want to edit darkscape info can go there, rather than ending up here with nothing to read. MolMan 18:21, September 17, 2015 (UTC)
You make the point of excluding much information on Darkscape here. If it's excluded here, then pretty much by default it goes on some other site, maybe a Wikia site, maybe not. Such a site would certainly be a waste of my time and effort, since I intend not to play it. People who do choose to play it would have a different opinion, I'm sure. --Saftzie (talk) 20:50, September 17, 2015 (UTC)
Isn't it a moot point now as someone went bold and already created a darkscape wikia? --Deltaslug (talk) 18:35, September 18, 2015 (UTC)
Not necessarily. There are other Runescape fansites. Their existence doesn't mean this one should shut down. Similarly the existence of Darkscape information on another wiki doesn't mean it should be excluded here. However, the clear the consensus in this discussion and the fact that people are already playing Darkscape do indicate that there's not much point in keeping this discussion open for a whole week. --Saftzie (talk) 20:37, September 18, 2015 (UTC)
I meant as in relation to the original topic. Jagex asked if we wanted to include Darkscape content in RSwikia (among others). Someone has already created a wikia specifically for Darkscape. So what would be the point of adding Darkscape content to RSwikia content when there is already a wikia dedicated to Darkscape? --Deltaslug (talk) 21:50, September 18, 2015 (UTC)
In which case, the Darkscape wiki isn't a Jagex-recognized fansite. I'm too lazy to check if the Classic wiki and the Old School wiki are recognized fansites, but the argument applies regardless of whether they are or not. --Saftzie (talk) 22:03, September 18, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - Perhaps the distinction to make, even (especially?) when MattHe says "If you decide to include DarkScape on your fansite ...," is that this is a Runescape fansite, not a Jagex fansite. I'm sure Jagex would love it if all their customers gathered together to have an "Up with Jagex" party, but that's not why most of us (IMO) are here, even though Runescape is a Jagex product. --Saftzie (talk) 20:50, September 17, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - Another question is who, if anyone here, would be interested in helping out with the DS wiki? Some discussion has already started over there on importing pages, and Jr Meme informed Pk King on how to copy this wiki over to there (instead of importing), but nothing else has happened yet. Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 20:30, September 18, 2015 (UTC)

I would prefer it if we created “dark.runescape” rather than use Pk King’s “darkscape”. According to Cook this would be better with respect to search results, and it would seem that Pk King is not going about importing content in the right way. Besides, Pk King’s wiki is still in its infancy, so it’s not as though anything significant would be lost. Temujin 03:16, September 19, 2015 (UTC)
That's the question indeed. I know I won't because I don't like PK-ing. And I agree with Temujin that dark.runescape (or darkscape.runescape) would be better. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 03:20, September 19, 2015 (UTC)
Fun fact: There is/was a "Dark RuneScape wiki" made when I was fairly new to the wiki. It was about preventing ingame scams; not sure what we'd do with that one now that DarkScape's a thing. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 12:57, September 19, 2015 (UTC)
I assume you’re referring to [[w:c:darkrunescape:Main Page|this]], but in any case we presumably won’t do anything with it. Temujin 13:07, September 19, 2015 (UTC)

Separate - As per many before me and as said before there is a precedence with 07 and a wiki was already created for it. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 03:14, September 19, 2015 (UTC)

New wiki - There are many more differences than people think. It's not just RS with open PvP. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 04:09, September 20, 2015 (UTC)

New wiki - because reasons svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 17:16, September 21, 2015 (UTC)

This request for closure is complete A user has requested closure for DarkScape. Request complete. The reason given was: Closed by Liquidhelium 01:59, September 24, 2015 (UTC)

Temujin 06:49, September 23, 2015 (UTC)

Closed - Information on DarkScape will be limited to the article DarkScape on this wiki. Detailed information that would normally warrant its own article should not be hosted on this wiki. --LiquidTalk 01:59, September 24, 2015 (UTC)