Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Demo/Full version compatiblity

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • replied
    Originally posted by IndySkies View Post
    As someone who has been playing UTDemo v348 since 2000, I disagree

    Demo and retail should be kept seperate, it makes no sense to have them compatible.
    Is there a specific reason you still play the demo? I'd like to think you have the full version. At least by now

    I voted no. If you want to play people with the full version then go buy the full version.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by IndySkies View Post
    As someone who has been playing UTDemo v348 since 2000, I disagree
    That is your right. It's also a LONG time to play a demo.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Keep those demo servers, man I just can't get enought faceclassic!!


    </sarcasm>

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by >>Gunslinger<< View Post
    Demo must expire.
    As someone who has been playing UTDemo v348 since 2000, I disagree

    Demo and retail should be kept seperate, it makes no sense to have them compatible.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Demo must expire.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Bersy View Post
    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.
    Great idea. This option gets my vote.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Once again ... No.

    I'm willing to plunk down around $3K for a kick-*** server for UT3 and have it co-located, but not if retail owners will be inhabiting demo servers again. I won't waste the cash or my time.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    voted no, for the reason mentioned countless times before this thread existed - people with retail copies should populate retail instead of demo servers

    But I like Bersy's idea of limited time compatibility too

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    This same discussion is getting a little tedious. What's more tedious, is the fact the same useless ideas keep being brought up again and again when they obviously have flaws.

    You can't make the demo worse, there is nothing wrong with making the demo brilliant (it will attract far more people) AS LONG AS you somehow limit their play time, or atleast their online playtime.

    You can't just do nothing about it and let them play on it for as long as they want. The UT2004 demo was good enough to not need the full game to enjoy it tbh.

    I hope Epic do plan this carefully, they must've listened to the number of posts on this subject. It's not easy to make the best choice but it's probably possible once you weigh out all the pro's & con's. I still think having a timer on the demo is one of the best (that's not the same as closing all demo servers after a year, which isn't gonna work for ****). If you feed them something brilliant, then cut their online play time short after a while... they are going to miss it and have an urge buy it.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Xyx View Post
    Anyone complaining about overly popular demo servers should read this carefully and consider what the current state of affairs would have been if the demo had contained DesertIsle instead of Rankin.
    I really don't think it makes much of a difference when most people think the retail version of the game sucks anyways. You can't trick people into consistently play a game they don't like.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Sero View Post
    making the demo intentionally suck is really not the way to get people to buy a game
    Anyone complaining about overly popular demo servers should read this carefully and consider what the current state of affairs would have been if the demo had contained DesertIsle instead of Rankin.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I really think that this is a problem in UT2k4 that we have control over. The big one I see is the Catalyst CTF server. It's really the only NW CTF server that I get decent ping to and I see players on consistently. If the server admins just all the sudden decided to switch it off demo I think people would still play there, and maybe other servers would follow. It's not really the compatibility to blame here. There's plenty of people out here complaining about the public server situation, but they don't do anything about it. Everyone needs to stop whining about it start supporting retail servers.

    I mean sure yeah if they weren't compatible it wouldn't be a problem. Yet that doesn't solve the larger problem of people just not having anywhere to play. The mutators and so forth are just dominating everything on the public servers, and instead of people going out and actively supporting a NW CTF server they stop playing and whine all the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    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)

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X