Dgc1808 said:
Hephaestos said:
Dgc1808 said:
"Imagine user A visits locations one to ten through that day, and they get home and sync with the server and it uploads to the Near server your ten locations that you've been to.
"User B comes along, does the same thing, but at some point in User B's day they passed User A's location five, which means they're now able to collect gifts that that user's dropped. That comes into the Near application and then in-game they pick up those gifts."
Underlined: If it was strictly internet based and NOT console to console local connections, there would be no need to sync the locations you've been with a server after getting home. Since you would be connected already you would have synced then and there. It's clearly a feature that can be used offline.
Italic: Clearly refering to the two systems being in proximity.
EDITED
|
I base my interpretation on the same sentences as you and we have the opposit meaning :-p
underline... if it was console to console you would not need to have a server in the middle.
The italic means that if I go to the empire state building at 2PM and then you go there at 4PM, you'll have passed through my location and thus will be able to collect the gift that I dropped. There is no connection or proximity between the PSVitas.
.... I think that if we argue on this it'll be a pointless back and forth as it's interpretation of the same sentences... :-/
|
Ah, I see what you mean, now. Makes sense except one thing. What would you be connecting to at the various locations if it wasn't other PS Vita's? Internet hotspots? If so then there would be no need to sync the 10 locations when you get home because you would have synced then and there at the hotspot.
|
good point! I guess it would be hotspots yes... or is there a GPS on the vita? that or part of the description is missing :p
edit: actually in the other parts they speak a lot of triangulation with 3G... but then the wifi model would not benefit from that.
