Demo/Full version compatiblity

[Destini]

What do you mean, "wtf"? Is that supposed to be an argument or something?

Simple scenario:
1) I play UT3 demo. It contains the best map(s), all weapons and lots of easy opponents (aka: everyone that's new to the franchise)
2) I buy the full game. It comes with more maps, but the experience isn't as good as the demo was (perhaps the easy enemies had something to do with that?)
3) as such, I download a new copy of the demo, install it (on another folder, or a different drive for all I care) and play it whenever I feel like it instead of the "real" UT3

To keep up with your conversational skills: "allowing, wtf". You don't allow people to have both versions installed...you just can't deny it to them. At least not without an entire registration procedure just to be able to play a demo game (which'll scare new blood away pretty much equally fast as demo-botters will).

I figured it was so obvious as to why I said it, that it didn't mean to be mentioned. You seem to think this idea of people keeping 2 copies side by side is going to be a big problem... The simple fact is I can't see that many players keeping both the demo and the full game. The amount of people who would go to the effort of doing that (such as yourself) is going to be so low it's not even worth considering.
It sounds like this idea came to you one night and you actually think it's a good point to bring up, the reality is it's ****ing ridiculous. I guess you think that because you will, that the majority of others will, that's not the case at all and, tbh, would be ignorant to think so.

[ne_skaju]

Epics need make demo servers not downloadable and inslall their own.
Though listen servers should be allowed (for LAN games)

[unbecoming]

no way

I know its an old thread,but I have to chime in here.

NO!

If u like it buy it.Demo is supposed to be a small rep sample of what you will get with the full purchase.Although I appreciate Epics generousity with the 2k4 demo I think it may have hurt their sales some by releasing a lil' too much and allowing noobs to be pummeled.

It makes no difference to me as I will buy the game regardless more than likely.

I am all for a hefty demo mainly for the feedback apsect of it,but I am totally against demo and retail playing together.I will not list all of my reasons because most have been addressed already,but heres one of the biggest reasons it would hurt epics profit and money is the language they understand the best.

Epic will never be able to draw in new customers if they think everyone is going to beat them down every game.They need to join and play with players their caliber so they can all be on a level playing field and improve gradually together.

Furthermore the experienced players do not want to be burdened with having a stone cold noob in their game.Theres no challenge in fragging them and they weigh your team down as a mate.

I help new players where I can because WE WERE ALL THERE at one time,but I strongly feel it's in the best interest of everyone to keep demo and retail separated.Maybe after a year or two combine them or something.

[Ultron]

I think there should be one DM map and one CTF map, a couple models (one male and one female) and no vehicles. Then there should be one ONS/Conquest/Assault/whatever map with vehicles, etc. But the retail game should not be compatable with the demo servers, and bots should be disabled by default on both the demo and retail servers.

Those were the biggest two problems we had with the two UT2 games - demo/retail compatability and an endless sea of bots across servers. Who the hell wants to have most of the servers populated by n00bs on limited map selections, and bots for online play? I can get bots locally without any lag of network play, and I'd like to see more than a few heavily-played maps.

Hopefully Epic prevents this debacle from happening to UT3.

[Piglet]

I agree - except that there should be zero or one bot to balance the team numbers

[Destini]

I agree - except that there should be zero or one bot to balance the team numbers

totally disagree with the exception, would unbalance everything

[Mort_Q]

totally disagree with the exception, would unbalance everything

Please explain.

[StalwartUK]

I agree - except that there should be zero or one bot to balance the team numbers

I disagree with this. I don't relish the idea of having a bot teammate just to make the team numbers even. I don't think that it would really work out in multiplayer games and instead mess up the game for the team in question and maybe even all the teams.

[MonsOlympus]

Actually heres a point I have tried to tell people when playing online is the past. Say you got one awesome player shouldnt the other team have an extra lesser player to make it fair? So like 5on4 or even 5on3 could be fair against a team which is obviously better. I would much rather uneven team numbers as long as the team skill is on par, it might even get rid of these people who like to switch to the other team and back and forwards all the time so the game swings either way and isnt one sided. I would prefer just to be completely flogged then have to keep up with who's on my team all the time

[TWD]

Well I play on stock servers myself (stock aside from UTComp) and even some of them have CBP2 on them but the server is rarely populated so I'll hop on there every now and then with a friend if they want a match. Not very often do people join though because its a choice of an almost full demo server vs 2 people on a retail one.

I never really bring it up much myself except if someone makes a thread about it, its not something I feel I could change by running around ranting about it so I just play on retail servers myself and kinda boycott demo servers where I can. I think the only one I frequent is a torlan only demo server but it is weird cause it has a few different node setups. Usually 1 full round is enough to do me though so its not like I spend any amount of time more on this ONS demo server then I do on retail DM/CTF servers.

I spose I could start a server myself but its not like there isnt plenty of retail servers just sitting there empty or half empty at peek hours. Honestly if you think you can run a good server and it'll pull people into retail servers its not a waste of energy

Well I guess it's a different problem I have. I can't even find a good EMPTY server. A lot of the ones that are set up stock, are set up very poorly. It seems to me that all of the server admins that knew what they were doing went over to TAM. If I found a good server I would be pushing everyone I know to get on and play with me every day. I think there's enough of us to support a server it just requires enough campaigning and a decent server to start with.

[MonsOlympus]

Well I guess it's a different problem I have. I can't even find a good EMPTY server. A lot of the ones that are set up stock, are set up very poorly. It seems to me that all of the server admins that knew what they were doing went over to TAM. If I found a good server I would be pushing everyone I know to get on and play with me every day. I think there's enough of us to support a server it just requires enough campaigning and a decent server to start with.

Yeah I know what you mean most of the FFA servers I play on dont have the udamage on and personally I would love to see a server which ran udamage rules which to me is kinda a stock thing. Im not too big on super weapons online but alot of servers have those turned off as well so when I say stock its not really stock as theres no udamage, no super weapons and no adrenaline.

I kinda just put up with some settings for the sake of it I think, things like low grav and super berserk can be really refreshing along with instagib so it would be nice to see a sever which rotated those in at random times as well hey. Like I said I can understand no super weapons and even no adrenaline but theres not much to the game when you remove all that so you get timing of the shields and thats about it.

Its annoying to have **** maplists though as server admins just seem to whack them in there without giving some thought to which are the better 2k3/4 maps and which custom ones people will play more often. I get where your coming from, there are acouple of decent servers here to play on but the best ones are actually invasion servers, mind you one of those has a heap of custom content it makes it kinda fresh though where the other one is just 2k4 with CBP2 and RPG mut. The DM ones all run UTComp with virtually the same settings except one is 1on1 one is FFA etc, I think acouple of them can be voted to different gametypes.

[Devastation]

A-lot of decent ideas in this thread. I voted that the demo + full version should be compatable, but: I think StatTracking for the demo and full version should be separate. I know that when I have a sucky game I'll intentionally scope out a game with sucky players and pwn the shyt out of them to get my stats back up :P, and for people with the full game, the Demo servers are a good place to do that. Now I say: screw that! Keep stats separate!

Of course, some people don't give 2 shyts about stats, but many people do, and it would definitely help keep a-lot of people in the full version servers.

This is coming from a Demo player, mind you :P. The Demo is exceptionally good, and I know that very few people play Unreal Tournament 2004 anymore, so why get the full version?

*****I think the key to getting people to buy the Full-Length version of this game would be BETTER ADVERTIZING and MORE REFINED GAMEPLAY. If Epic can get all those old-schoolers that STILL play UT(1999) to play Unreal Tournament 3, that would be a great boost to UT3. Also, getting people away from HALO would help a boat-load...*****