Checkpoints

How come checkpoints don't bring you back to the time that you hit them? In CR, you;d hit a checkpoint at let's say, 5 seconds. You die three seconds later, hit enter, your time is back at 5 seconds. That doesn't happen here, ergo you have to beat every track first try to simply get a good time. Not a big fan of this. Is this going to get changed?

 

Checkpoint time is a matter we are currently looking into. We've seen many competitive players who prefer the current version in which the clock keeps running, thus rewarding players who are able to complete maps without crashing.
However, it may be changed back if enough concern is shown by the community.

 

It should be reverted back. I am a competitive player, and I like to perfect my ghosts up against others.

 

I play tracks by restarting multiple times until I do certain things perfectly, so I don't like this system too much.

 

Yep. I think it should be reverted. It's why I've only ghosted non-checkpoint tracks so far

 

I'd rather watch a really cool and fast ghost, than to watch someone keep messing up multiple times. Most of the CR members just cared about doing trick ghosts, and making them look perfect, I understand where you're coming from though.

 

I think it should be reverted back aswell.

p.s. I'm actually really good at ghosting and rarely mess up, I'm just slow.

 

If we're voting, I vote for the new system. It's a change, something new. It'll bring a new dynamic to the game.

 

there's other sites with the old ghosting system, why not have one with a different one?

 

1st of; i wouldnt watch a ghost where people manipulate their browsers to be slow, and making the game lag anyways, which is what mostly everyone is doing these days. its tabu because no one likes to admit that they aren't as good as they want people to believe, but you all know its true. in shorter words, i dont watch ghosts.
although, i find this current checkpoint solution, in which the time keeps ticking, more challenging and enjoyable. and as ive always been a fan of challenging tracks, i like this solution better.
it will also create more room for improvement between the top ghosts. as there is more likely to be more time differencials between the ghosts now, than it was at cr. the top 5 ghosts on cr would normally have about 0,3 sec difference from 1st ghost to 5th ghost on a popular track, which kind of makes them all the same. having larger time differencials, will make the nr 1 ghost appear much more impressive than the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th ghost.

 

If you want a good run on a fairly long track, then checkpoints are useless. To me it feels like FRHD has no checkpoints at all. It's going back to the whole one shot type deal with each run. With that being said, my ghosting skills have diminished a lot since I dont have a proper keyboard. Damn anti-ghosting.

 

It will diminish the trick ghost factor. Hard to make an awesome looking ghost when you're struggling to survive.

 

i also want to add to my previous post, that this system will make it harder to take advantage of lag to get a "good looking" ghost, especially on longer runs. because if they use lag, they will have to use ALOT more time trying to finish a track, than they would if the clock restarted from each new try per checkpoint.
which is an other argument pro why this is a better system to make the truly good riders stand out.

and for those who are only interested in completing the track, and less concerned about the time, OR less skilled, they will have their checkpoints to go back to.

 

Stig Ya , thats the idea
People who care about time, wont use checkpoints as much. Reiterating your point, it's really for people less concerned about time, and more concerned about completing the track . This might be more important later when campaigns are in place, if we decide to go with a progressive system where you must complete a track to unlock the next one.

 

How bout keeping the actual time to complete the track for campaign mode, and on regular tracks checkpoints reset like CR? I feel like that would be balanced because you plan on keeping an updated campaign mode, so it would even out.

 

I'm completely against reverting back the time.

As someone who is always trying to reach the high score, I find it thrilling to do it all in one go. That is one of the many reasons why I like Free Rider better than the other stick-figure-bike-riding games.
One who reaches a high score in one singular try, and actually took the amount of time that their high score says, is much more deserving of the title than someone who may have just gotten lucky for every 5 second segment of a track.

Incorporating this new checkpoint nearly defeats the purpose of a high score in general. Think about it. Lets say someone gets in first place by taking 15 minutes to complete a 1 minute run, but the person in second place took 10 minutes to complete a 1 minute and 3 second run. Who really completed the track first?

If it really boils down to what the players want, then the best way to go is to include an option in editing a track that lets the author choose whether or not the time is reverted back.

I've been a Free Rider player for nearly 5 years now, and it will be really disappointing to see a change like this. That is just my opinion.

 

1st Place Guy can still spend more time on a track than Second Place Guy. It's just that you have to start the track over each time to do well. I like it, though, because it spaces the records out more. It makes it so that the amount of time it takes to brute force yourself a record is ridiculous, so you just have to get good.

 

There ya go then, that seems like a legit idea to me. Make it an option for the track creator. Therefore if he/she makes a really difficult trial & somebody wants to get a perfect, sick looking ghost, they will be able to.

 

This new system is pretty fun. Harder. I mean, ultra tricky tunnel (cf greg's one) would be IMPOSSIBLE in one try. The one who get it must be treated as god !

 

I can see some of y'alls points now. This could be a new step in the right direction, there's no reason to not try it out at least.