Demo/Full version compatiblity

[StalwartUK]

Well I mainly made this thread to take some heat off the PC/console compatiblity poll. Do do think that the two versions should be cross-compatible online?

Personally I would say no. Though I'm not in the UT2004 scene from what I've heard there being plenty of demo servers and few full servers it's pretty sad imo.

[dinwitty]

Usually a demo has limited models and various resources to keep the size down.
And usually for EPIC, from the demo things change.
So I really doubt compatibility would be possible.
However, if EPIC wants to try cross-platform gaming, they should release demos simultaneously for each of the platforms playing off single servers and see how the cross gaming reacts....

Interesting question, would like the PS3 be able to host as a server?

[fuegerstef]

So I really doubt compatibility would be possible.

Err, for Ut2k4 it happened that Torlan wasn't changed to keep compatbility between retail and demo.

[TWD]

The demo is patched when the full game is released. The demo was patched twice for 2k3 iirc.

I say yes. There's no advantage to keeping them seperate. The big deal is right now everything is demo servers. So the question is what's the cause? Is it A)That's just the way the servers are and everyone is too lazy to fight it or B)Not enough people play it.

So if it's A) then it's the server admin's fault for not setting up more vanilla servers. It's not the demo's fault. If anything it forces them to use standard gametypes instead of putting a trillion mutators on. If it's B) then we should all be glad that there is compatability otherwise there'd be nowhere to play.

Removing the demo compatibility just wouldn't get anybody anywhere. First off it wouldn't solve the problems we face now. Second off the problems we face probably won't exist in UT3. If they do then we're all screwed anyways.

[Raffi_B]

The bigger issue is compatibility across patch versions. If we answer that question, the question about demo/retail will be answered as well. I made a post about this in the console thread.

[Taleweaver]

Ugh...I see that people haven't got any smarter than last time this discussion came around . Against better odds, here goes:

If you make them not compatible, people will just keep their demo version next to their full version.

And it's all because compatibility isn't the real issue. The issue is that UT's demo's tend to ship with their best maps AND with pretty much all the weapons and vehicles. If UT2004 had shipped with maps like DesertIsle, Metallurgy or even Gael, this whole "the demo is more popular than the real game" thing wouldn't have happened in the first place.

[Devastator]

Ugh...I see that people haven't got any smarter than last time this discussion came around . Against better odds, here goes:

If you make them not compatible, people will just keep their demo version next to their full version.

And it's all because compatibility isn't the real issue. The issue is that UT's demo's tend to ship with their best maps AND with pretty much all the weapons and vehicles. If UT2004 had shipped with maps like DesertIsle, Metallurgy or even Gael, this whole "the demo is more popular than the real game" thing wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Taleweaver tells the truth. But then if the maps for the demo suck, peolple will say, "This game ain't no good". Basically it's a coin flip here.

[Hedge-o-Matic]

Considering how many people turn off all the options on the retail game, and then force models and play the same two maps over and over, people who just play the demo are getting almost the exact same experience, anyway.

[Wormbo]

I'm all for not allowing demo and retail version on the same server. Also, having some kind of unique ID for demo players (acting as a replacement for the retail players' CD key) would be nice for keeping abusive players off the servers.

I won't request any modding (or anti-cheat) options for demo servers or clients, though. The demo should be entirely locked down so users are forced to get the retail version if they want those features.

[theeDEATHMASTER]

No .

[Henrik]

Easy.

Make them compatible until the second or third patch, or the game's been out a year. Whichever comes first. Break compatibility in a patch, so the demo players will still have lots of servers for a while but they will be phased out, and people who play the full game and want to stay updated will be forced to stop playing on demo servers. Look at UT2004, we still have people going on Torlan/Primeval only servers and cleaning house with the noobs, and not playing on other servers with far better maps, meaning barely anyone ever joins the good servers anymore - how does this help the community?

So the solution is Yes, but only for a limited time. I still voted "No", because I believe that in the long run if they implemented it the same way they did in 2k4, it would hurt the game badly.

[Sero]

If UT2004 had shipped with maps like DesertIsle, Metallurgy or even Gael, this whole "the demo is more popular than the real game" thing wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Citadel and Gorge were the reason I didn't get ut2k3 and quickly removed the demo moments after trying it.

Of course that nasty 'preference' thing will always be a factor, but making the demo intentionally suck is really not the way to get people to buy a game

[TWD]

Particularly with a game like UT. Within a day of the demo's release there will be over 8,000 people at any given time playing the game. This is consistent with the numbers in the days following UT2k3 and 2k4's demo release. If the demo is good then that number will continue to climb, and the game will be successful over the long run. If it doesn't then that number will drop to like 4,000 by the time the full game is released, and we'll have the same trouble again.

The UT demo is like a family tradition in our community now. It's one of the most important factors in deciding what people think about the game. The worst thing they could do is make it suck by putting the really bad maps in it or something.

[ne_skaju]

I think that full and demo version should not be compatible. Also, demo should have some restrictions, such as:

No mutators and limit to 2 skins
Some map or even gametypes (warfare?) should be aviable only in botmatch
Multiplayer map should be not best (though I cannot call FACE/Torlan best maps) but remarkable to unreal series.
Also, what if limit player number to 10, for example (though it can make demo servers attractive for some kind of players)

[fuegerstef]

According to our statistics, 50% of the players on the demoservers of jolt are retail owners. I'd rather see them on retail servers only. You know, Torlan, Rankin and Face get a little boring after 3 years.

EDIT:
I might add that we have more than 1800 unique players a day. Force 900 of them to retail servers and things would be much more enjoyable.