@freq245, on Dec 4 2006, 05:59 AM, said in Online Playing for Registered Users:
You are able to play with people the areas you and they "unlocked" (with playing or with registrating), if this game was the way you mentioned the unregistered players would be able to play the entire multiplayer and as I said before, this could be enough for them.
Well, I think that's not true since they'll still be limited in the single-player mode, and they'll always have to play with registered users to play full multiplayer mode.
But if Ambrosia is really worried about that, then they could limit multiplayer in other ways so as not to penalize the registered user -- as I already suggested above, preventing unregistered users from getting super power-ups in network play, or starting them off with half-health or something like that.
The point is to penalize the un registered user, not the registered user.
That's this local and online playing part. If the other person stands near to you (local) it'll be able to hear your music, if you are just connected through the 'net it won't be able to do so, because you don't have the allowance to share your music with everyone you meet, especially not with strangers.
But the difference is that music is not predicated upon someone else listening to it with you. A key feature of SketchFighter is being able to play with someone else. So in order to be able to listen to the music (i.e.: play unfettered 2-player games), you have to wait until the other person purchases the music before you can listen to it.
I don't understand why everyone seems so resistant to moving to a StarCraft-like model of online play.
@mackilroy, on Dec 4 2006, 06:07 AM, said in Online Playing for Registered Users:
Then don't play with unregistered users. I don't mean to be short, but no one is making you play with them. You only have to submit to those limits if you want to play with an unregistered player. Your argument depends on you having to do something, while it's a choice instead.
WTF? The point is that there aren't always registered users on the tracker! So, no, it is not always a choice. If I want to play SketchFighter over the internet, I am sometimes forced to play with unregistered users.
Actually, consider when there are 7 registered users on a tracker. There will be 3 registered-registered user games, but then one registered user is left out, and is forced to play with unregistered users and be limited in what arenas he plays. Why? Why should this registered user not be able to play the arenas that were supposedly unlocked when he paid? Why should he be forced to wait for another registered player to come on just so he can play those other arenas?
Again I refer you to my other previous example: consider down the road 3 years from now when the tracker becomes pretty lifeless. But I happen to be on the tracker when an unregistered user comes on. This might be the only time in a week or two that I'll be able to play networked SketchFighter. Why should I be limited to the arenas that I paid to unlock, just because the only person that happens to be on at that time is an unregistered user?
And if you do play with an unregistered user, why not just enjoy what you can do? After all, it's an incentive for them to buy the game if they want to play more levels with you in multiplayer, thus rendering your point moot.
But it is an incentive for me to become annoyed, because I am not always able to play the arenas that were supposedly unlocked. Why should I care about whether another person registers or not? If I paid for unlocking those arenas, I think I should be able to play those arenas, regardless of what the other player has or has not done.
This post has been edited by simX : 04 December 2006 - 01:25 AM