It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionRelease: Divinity: Original Sin(602 posts)(602 posts)
(602 posts)
Pages:
1
5
10
15
20
25
30
33
34
35
36
37
41
This is my favourite topic
Posted July 09, 2014
A true RPG design achievement!

Divinity: Original Sin, the epic-scaled RPG from Larian Studios, very modern but also true to the best traditions of computer role playing games design with its isometric view, story-driven gameplay, and top-notch turn-based combat mechanics, is available for Windows and Mac OS X, DRM-Free on GOG.com! You can also enrich your experience with the Source Hunter DLC, that comes with two unique in-game items, a digital artbook, design documents and a full original soundtrack.

[url=http://www.gog.com/game/divinity_original_sin][/url]Divinity: Original Sin is the old-school role-playing title you've been dreaming about. If you were ever imagining how the legendary classics like Baldur's Gate would look and feel like, were they developed today, this is your answer! Larian Studios managed to make good on all of their promises of classic gameplay, extensive world, gripping storyline, and flexible system paired with high production value of contemporary double-A titles. With up to a hundred hours of playtime needed to beat the game with all of its branching stories and tons of optional quests the game can prove to be everything you want it to be, and more! It also takes what's best after the modern games: rich and vivid 3D graphics, an extensive item crafting system, and a finely balanced multi-player mode. A perfect mix of classic and new RPG design, if we ever saw one.

Set out to explore the fantastic colorful realm created by Larian Studios, and make a new home for yourself in the vibrant world of Divinity: Original Sin (or even grab some extra Source Hunter DLC gear), on GOG.com. The price of the game varies from region to region, but don't be alarmed! Following the GOG.com tradition we're offering a Fair Price Package with this title, so everyone who is adversely affected by the pricing plan will be compensated with gift-codes (you will find yours in your order confirmation email).

NOTE:
The version of the game offered here comes with the full single-player campaign, but currently supports only LAN/DirectIP multiplayer modes, with on-line multiplayer features coming as a later update, powered by GOG Galaxy, our DRM-Free online gaming platform. Thank you for your patience!
Posted July 12, 2014
Hey guys and girls.

I'm a 31 year old guy who is looking for a co-op partner for this game. If you live in europe and you're willing to skype while playing, send me a PM. Thanks in advance :)
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
HypersomniacLive:
I am aware of the Steam exclusive debacle, but I had thought that had more to do with the Shadowrun license and Microsoft, rather than the developers themselves?

I used Dragonfall more as an example of good DLC that wasn't a day one add-on. I can understand people getting pissed off about the stretch goal part, but the content itself that was ultimately released kind of made up for that, I felt.

I should have compared it more to the Assassin's Creed style DLC t-shirt things, or whatever it is the big names do these days.

Edit: Now I'm ranting, is it better to play the game now, or wait for a hardware upgrade that may or may not be happening soon?
Post edited July 12, 2014 by ShadowWulfe
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
real.geizterfahr: What I'm talking about, is the "patching process". GOG flags the game (this annoying red number) and you have to look what changed. A client, telling you "You have v1.0.57 - Patch 1.0.67 is available for download. Do you want to patch your game?" is far more convenient. Especially if GOG sticks with its own version numbers (I have setup_divinity_original_sin_2.3.0.6 and have downloaded a patch to 1.0.67 which turned out to be patch_divinity_original_sin_2.4.0.10, which has nothing to do with any version number) and is going to bring more new games.
This is an excellent point. I know I've looked at the updated game on my shelf a few times and wondered what the hell was changed. At least now it looks like they're showing what new files are available on the game page. But the version numbers should be shown as well (not just the GOG number but the dev version number too) on the game shelf. For those that don't want to use Galaxy, at the very least this info should be available on the game shelf.
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
real.geizterfahr: Patches will have to work with two "different" versions of the game. The game running under Galaxy and the game without Galaxy. So everything that adresses Galaxy, will either have to be some "if (Galaxy == true)" stuff (don't know if that's possible), or implemented into a seperate version of the same patch.
How is the patched game different from the unpatched game then? Game has to work with and without Galaxy, and if Galaxy is there, do extra stuff. How does the game's version come in effect then?
And what happens if you want to play with Galaxy on Monday, without Galaxy on Wednesday, and with Galaxy again on Friday? Do you need to install different versions?

The "If Galaxy then" is possible, and most likely the way it's done.
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
ShadowWulfe: I am aware of the Steam exclusive debacle, but I had thought that had more to do with the Shadowrun license and Microsoft, rather than the developers themselves?

[...]
Since MS holds the license, they either knew of the obstacles when they run their Kickstarter campaign, or they hastily put up their Kickstarter campaign before finalising the agreement with MS. Whatever the case, they made false promises and statements on their Kickstarter page which influenced the total backing - I wouldn't have backed it if it was clearly stated that it wouldn't be DRM-free for the general public.


avatar
ShadowWulfe: [...]

I used Dragonfall more as an example of good DLC that wasn't a day one add-on. I can understand people getting pissed off about the stretch goal part, but the content itself that was ultimately released kind of made up for that, I felt.

[...]
The point about this is that the DLC content was supposed to be also available to non-backers without additional cost.


And with this, I'm done derailing the thread. ;-)
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
HypersomniacLive:
Ugh, chalk it up to another case of someone not understanding DRM I guess?
The without additional cost part is definitely fishy. I still say the end product at least made up for that a little bit. The Dragonfall experience was one of the more memorable ones that I've had recently.

If Risen 2 locks up my computer unless on super ugly settings, will D:OS do the same?
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
Pheace: They wouldn't. GOG is the one who'd be making the different versions, not the developers.

And at the very least, your suggestion of uploading it *once* requires that both versions be ready at the same time, which could mean a delay because of the non-Galaxy versions. Which would mean a delay versus the Steam ones, which could mean people on games like D:OS can't play together because of mismatches.

Basically the question comes down to,
Can GOG deliver the Galaxy/Non-Galaxy patches just as fast as Steam can deliver its patches. (I know the S-word is bad, but in these cases, it's relevant)

If they can't, I wouldn't be surprised to see them do Galaxy patching before Non-Galaxy. Maybe not by much of a difference, but the Galaxy ones should be the easiest.
If i understand what you said : your answer has no sense because if i remember correctly Judas said something like the extra content for Galaxy will be inert if you don't use the client. So to simply put it there will be one patch and not two (Galaxy / non-Galaxy one). Information to take with cautions; with the few infos we know about Galaxy. :)

Delivering two different patches would be erm , not a good idea.... ;)
Post edited July 12, 2014 by DyNaer
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
real.geizterfahr: I... don't think so. I've never seen a store doing anything to the patches. To avoid any misunderstandings: I'm talking about the contents of the patch - the actual code - not about the installer it's coming in.

Patches will have to work with two "different" versions of the game. The game running under Galaxy and the game without Galaxy. So everything that adresses Galaxy, will either have to be some "if (Galaxy == true)" stuff (don't know if that's possible), or implemented into a seperate version of the same patch. Asking devs for two different patches is a bad idea (GOG already gets most patches delayed), so it should be one patch for both game versions. That's what I was talking about. Ideally, Galaxy and non-Galaxy version will use the same installers - it's less work for GOG. If GOG has to do two different installers, there'll probably be a slight delay between Galaxy and non-Galaxy. But I think that should be negligible (don't know how long it takes to wrap an installer around a patch, but this shouldn't take too long).
The thing is, if it's that easy, what's keeping them from doing that for the current patching?

And no, it's not only been a delay because they introduced a bad bug. That was the delay for the last patch yes, but before the game was released to the public here and only available to backers there was a lot of delay for the patching, there was even a thread about it.

The work for putting a wrapper around a patch *may* be negligible, but if, for instance, the patch is sent out when no-one is in the office, then there's still going to be a delay.
avatar
DyNaer: If i understand what you said : your answer has no sense because if i remember correctly Judas said something like the extra content for Galaxy will be inert if you don't use the client. So to simply put it there will be one patch and not two (Galaxy / non-Galaxy one).

Delivering two different patches would be erm , not a good idea.... ;)
This is about 2 different ways to install the game. It has nothing to do with Galaxy being required for certain content.

The point is, they said that nothing would change with Galaxy. You'd be able to install, with Galaxy, and have auto updating, *but* the old way, of having installers and patches on the website for you to download without ever having to use Galaxy would remain.

So there's patching through Galaxy, and there's the patcher which needs to work *without* Galaxy. The latter of which will most likely need to be a wrapped executable and put up on the website, rather than something simpler like how Galaxy may work, by updating a root version of the game and any modified files being automatically uploaded to people who have the game installed. (assuming they have auto-update on, or if they call for an update through Galaxy)
Post edited July 12, 2014 by Pheace
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
Pheace: The point is, they said that nothing would change with Galaxy. You'd be able to install, with Galaxy, and have auto updating, *but* the old way, of having installers and patches on the website for you to download without ever having to use Galaxy would remain.

So there's patching through Galaxy, and there's the patcher which needs to work *without* Galaxy. The latter of which will most likely need to be a wrapped executable and put up on the website, rather than something simpler like how Galaxy may work, by updating a root version of the game and any modified files being automatically uploaded to people who have the game installed. (assuming they have auto-update on, or if they call for an update through Galaxy)
yes that's what they said. But we don't have enough informations, we don't know if there will be a feature to save the installer / patches as executables like we have at the noment on the website.

I understand your point though
Post edited July 12, 2014 by DyNaer
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
DyNaer: But we don't have enough informations, we don't know if there will be a feature to save the installer / patches as executables like we have at the noment on the website.
I think due to popular demand this will probably be an option for thos ewho want it. However, that doesn't change the fact that those installer/patch exec's need to exist, and they need to be put on the website as well as be available through the downloader.

So likely, they will still have two different ways of patching.
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
Pheace: However, that doesn't change the fact that those installer/patch exec's need to exist, and they need to be put on the website as well as be available through the downloader.

So likely, they will still have two different ways of patching.
There's no need for those to be different with Galaxy anymore than there is a need now with the website and installer dichotomy.

You could have the Galaxy client download the installer/patches and launch the installation or you could have something like self-extracting zip files, where you have a file that can be executed to do the installation without the Galaxy client but the Galaxy client can treat it like a package a la .rpm/.deb.

I obviously don't know how they're gonna do it but I know that there is no need to have separate versions for the website and the Galaxy client.

It also wouldn't make financial sense as it would double the testing load and thus expense.

Speaking of testing, does anybody know the difference between the process of getting a patch on Steam and on GOG?

I ask because a difference in the amount of testing done by the stores (especially if one does no testing) after receiving the patch (i.e. after it has been tested by the developers) could easily explain part of why GOG is slower in getting patches out the door.
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
srilumpa: Speaking of testing, does anybody know the difference between the process of getting a patch on Steam and on GOG?

I ask because a difference in the amount of testing done by the stores (especially if one does no testing) after receiving the patch (i.e. after it has been tested by the developers) could easily explain part of why GOG is slower in getting patches out the door.
On Steam it's all automated. Devs can push out their own patches to the store. As far as I'm aware they can simply upload to the location of the core game and any changes to it will be uploaded to Steam users who have the game installed. There's no testing there. The state of the game is the devs responsibility.

That's one of the worries people have for GOG. Supposedly they do some in-house testing before releasing it. If that stays true, they can never update at the same time as Steam, there will always be a delay.

If they don't, well then they loose what some people consider good about GOG's patching style.

@Patching, the Exe thing is a possibility, but then that basically means the patches would be in the same state they are now. If that's the case, but there's already regular delays when it comes to new patches, then what reason is there to believe it will be any faster after Galaxy? Galaxy might allow auto-downloading etc, but unless they have an incredibly inefficient way of doing the patches right now and overhaul it intensively with Galaxy I don't see why that would allow them to do it faster.
Post edited July 12, 2014 by Pheace
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
srilumpa: Speaking of testing, does anybody know the difference between the process of getting a patch on Steam and on GOG?

I ask because a difference in the amount of testing done by the stores (especially if one does no testing) after receiving the patch (i.e. after it has been tested by the developers) could easily explain part of why GOG is slower in getting patches out the door.
avatar
Pheace: On Steam it's all automated. Devs can push out their own patches to the store. As far as I'm aware they can simply upload to the location of the core game and any changes to it will be uploaded to Steam users who have the game installed. There's no testing there. The state of the game is the devs responsibility.

That's one of the worries people have for GOG. Supposedly they do some in-house testing before releasing it. If that stays true, they can never update at the same time as Steam, there will always be a delay.

If they don't, well then they loose what some people consider good about GOG's patching style.

@Patching, the Exe thing is a possibility, but then that basically means the patches would be in the same state they are now. If that's the case, but there's already regular delays when it comes to new patches, then what reason is there to believe it will be any faster after Galaxy? Galaxy might allow auto-downloading etc, but unless they have an incredibly inefficient way of doing the patches right now and overhaul it intensively with Galaxy I don't see why that would allow them to do it faster.
The only delays we really experience with patches is when we don't get the new version/patch/etc. and when there is a severe gamebreaking issue with a patch where it breaks a game to the point of becoming unplayable.
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
JudasIscariot: The only delays we really experience with patches is when we don't get the new version/patch/etc. and when there is a severe gamebreaking issue with a patch where it breaks a game to the point of becoming unplayable.
Ow I see. So you're saying it was Larian who didn't send the patches then when the Kickstarters were already playing the original release?
Post edited July 12, 2014 by Pheace
Posted July 12, 2014
avatar
JudasIscariot: The only delays we really experience with patches is when we don't get the new version/patch/etc. and when there is a severe gamebreaking issue with a patch where it breaks a game to the point of becoming unplayable.
avatar
Pheace: Ow I see. So you're saying it was Larian who didn't send the patches then when the Kickstarters were already playing the original release?
No, not saying that at all, actually :)

I am talking about patches in general :)
Post edited July 12, 2014 by JudasIscariot
Pages:
1
5
10
15
20
25
30
33
34
35
36
37
41
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionRelease: Divinity: Original Sin(602 posts)(602 posts)
(602 posts)