Damn, i didn't even think about it being a competition.

If one entrant finds it objectionable, i won't push for it being part of the compo.
I'd be perfectly fine with staying out of the compo (entering as category 2), but:
-if this hypothetical new hardware feature was reserved for non-competing entries only, it'll probably see less use.
-if it sees less use, it's hard to motivate its inclusion in case it adds any extra cost to either r&d or material reproduction; and/or means hours of extra work for infiniteneslives.
-we're two in this project and i can only speak for myself at this point.
The "third way" i can think of is that as far as the compo is concerned, noone assumes saving: Fully implemented saving (be it score boards, campaign status, level unlocks) is subject to disqualification. Non-functional remnants (like having a save room with no function) is not subject to score setting. Then
post-compo, implement anything you want saved in your entry. Games that'd be geared for saving would actually have a disadvantage this way, because the saving isn't implemented for judging although the design might be dependent. I don't feel i have a clear overview if that sort of thing would be interesting enough, though. What do you think?
tepples wrote:
Do the 1 sitting version now, then an expanded version later.
That would at any rate be easier in regards to workload. It'll probably be this or some password related compromise.
pubby wrote:
Also, it is my belief that 64K without extra RAM is a really healthy limit for our contest
I agree that an upper limit of 64k is quite golden. For future compos though, isn't the ability to store letting people be more creative/making content of higher polish with roughly the same workload/constraints?