Edit: Should have included X4 in the title, sorry.

So I made up my mind to buy this game earlier than I normally would (/r/patientgamers habits), partially because I'd like to repay Egosoft for the enormous fun I had with X3:TC/AP, which I bought in a pretty low sale. I always felt like I kinda ripped them off on that one. But I still can't decide *where* to buy it. With the game available here on GOG, the decision sounds like a no-brainer. The only thing that might prevent me from buying here would be if the devs were to neglect their GOG version (long delays in patch releases, missing features, that sort of thing). Is this the case with X4?

Well, 1.5 beta 1 was released 5 hours ago, so far no patch on gog.

1.32 beta was added a few days late from what I heard and the 1.32 full patch is still labeled as beta 1 patch. (they are the same supposedly)

The situation might be better if you use the gog client, I'm not sure.

I miss the days when the developer just released a patch themselves and you could download it from them or mirrors in other places.

That is... disappointing. Now I don't really demand immediate beta access (it's only for testing anyway, not for actually playing), and I can live with actual patches hitting a day or so later. I can live with it, even though I feel like I shouldn't have to. But delays upwards of several days and perpetual beta versions instead of live releases are a different story. That's a pretty depressing sign for future handling of the GOG version.

Also, there's the rumors about some planned 'multiplayer' features. While I personally couldn't care less about this aspect, I fear that these features may very well never make it into the GOG version. And missing features are *never* a good thing, even if it's some tacked on obscure 'community' stuff.

Just to be clear: What is up on gog as the 1.32 beta upload is supposedly actually the same as the real 1.32 (nothing changed between beta and normal) and "just" labeled wrongly.

Apparently any real time in game multiplayer is off the cards; don't ask me why they stated this it's just what i've read.
So the question is what multiplayer would look like...
Well it wouldn't be multiplayer if it didn't affect your world so it is likely to have stations built as independant factions where others build them.
At best you might even get their traders and their route patrols as part of a 'save collation'.
At worst it will just be a leaderboard updating from a digital distribution platforms services notably using it's 'achievements'.
Personally I don't think it's worth holding your breath for.

I am of the same mind about missing features although more fanatical about it. Missing features make an inferior product; could you imagine if they did that with houses?
You can pay more for a mansion, but it will never have a pool because every builder/supplier doesn't want to allow non permanent residents to compete in terms of luxury and every owner of a pool supporting them because they're afraid of being denied the right to own a pool or to keep non-residents out of it.
It really is ridiculous that the free market that has strict laws to prevent and punish monopolistic behaviour is allowed to develop institutionally walled gardens with the direct effect of reducing consumer choice and restricting competition.
But I digress; i don't think you can judge Egosoft on your point based on 1 game, but based on the series and the fact that they are single player I believe they have done a passable job.
The time delay on patches on GOG seem to be one of geolocation of GOG's team and that they check before they upload things into the wider community.
We may want to have patches from the developer be automatically uploaded through their GOG's Galaxy app/website, but it's not how GOG does business and that is not the developers fault.
That said where it DOES matter is with multiplayer where version missmatch is a key problem creating a split market (one on the latest multiplayer which players therefore gravitate to becoming the defacto functional version [steam], and one that therefore does not have the player base to make large multiplayer or multiplayer with brisk game lobbying and thus a subpar end user experience [ergo. inferior product]).

Versions are in parity between Steam and GOG. I completly disagree with sentiment that somehow GOG version is behind. Using Galaxy client I did get access to all the versions (beta and public) pretty much at the same time as they were announced on Egosoft forums and put on Steam.

usually Steam gets first dibs with GOG Galaxy very close behind. Then the backup downloads which tend to be a day or 2 late.

You can all complain, but the fact that GOG is DRM free is easily enough for me to wait the extra time required.At least we`re not chained to DRM Steam. Look on the bright side.

p.s. And if you`re THAT bothered about multiplayer (I am happy being SP) then you might as well go Steam, since you`ll be DRmed anyway.

Sadly it's quite often more than just a day or two, especially when a weekend is involved. And yes, a day or two won't really hurt. But if a highly anticipated game just got released and suffers from bugs you just NEED timely updates. And if buyers of that very game get those updates earlier on other platforms, you may start to think long and hard, don't you?

Also I won't install GOG Galaxy because of that. Galaxy is optional, the main form of distribution on GOG is the classic download. At least that's the way why I changed to GOG in the first place. More than 1000 games ago... DRM free is the reason why I bought it on GOG instead of Steam, yes. But that choice doesn't include late (or even missing) patches. I provided timely payment (which was my part of the contract), now I expect timely distribution (which is GOG's part). GOG is no longer that small startup restoring and selling only good old games, they expanded rapidly to a notable distributor of games of all kind. They sell full-prized games (i.e. X4 Foundations) and therefore should offer full service, too.

I understand that and you`re right. But I remember the days when we didn`t have any option at all except Steam. It was Steam DRM or nothing. End of. I hated that time. I even said at the time I would rather wait longer and pay £10 more for a non-steam, non-DRM alternative.

I got my wish with GOG. So as far as I`m concerned what we have now is 10 X better. I don`t need to complain.[i][/i]

It's better. Not ten times better, but better. That's why I always prefer GOG over Steam. But it could be even better with timely updates. And that might encourage even more user to select GOG. It should be GOG's primary concern to improve their service. Service is the key to gain and hold customers. Ask Amazon!

I have to disagree and say it is 10 X better, Sir. And as I said earlier I agree with you on most issues, yet for the reasons I mention above, I can tolerate how things are.

I`m trying not to be adversarial here, but i`m not just going to agree with all you say just to make you happy.

There is no need for you to make me happy and no need to "Sir" me either, btw. And it's perfectly fine to have another opinion than mine. Most people do, I guess. Nevertheless it should be fine to discuss such matters in a civilized manner and within a forum topic about Egosoft's treatment of Steam and GOG X4 versions. But maybe I'm wrong.

Response from support on this: So sadly this rather important beta patch will not be available for manual download. A 2-tiered class system for GoG customers that pay the same. :-(

you can use Galaxy just for updating and otherwise run the game independently of Galaxy, as i am currently doing with No Man's Sky, and also now with X4.

i installed X4 using Galaxy and then afterwards made a shortcut that points directly to X4's .exe, allowing me to run it independently.

NMS was installed without Galaxy, but Galaxy still lets me update it anyway (though i may have had to tell Galaxy which folder i'd installed it in, i can't recall sorry)

perhaps this might be worth a try if it's important to you.