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

×
I downloaded and installed La-Mulana a while back, and I believe that at the time, the "Windows installer" in the game tab was set as version 1.0.0. Afterwards, when the Universal update to 1.0.1 came out, I also installed it without an issue and played a bit of the game.

However, looking at the game in my library today, I see that the installer is in version 2.0.0, with the update still available. I don't recall having been warned of this change as I usually am when there is an update to a game on GOG. I downloaded the new installer, and it installed in a different folder from the previous one, by default. Now, I have two different executables of the game installed, their shortcuts' icons are different, and the savegames seem compatible with both.

Is this 2.0.0 really a new version of the game, even though there's no mention of it in the changelog? I'll probably keep playing on the new install, since the savegames from the old one are functional. Also, should I apply the 1.0.1 patch on this "2.0.0" install?
This question / problem has been solved by DCTimage
avatar
Lenok: I downloaded and installed La-Mulana a while back, and I believe that at the time, the "Windows installer" in the game tab was set as version 1.0.0. Afterwards, when the Universal update to 1.0.1 came out, I also installed it without an issue and played a bit of the game.

However, looking at the game in my library today, I see that the installer is in version 2.0.0, with the update still available. I don't recall having been warned of this change as I usually am when there is an update to a game on GOG. I downloaded the new installer, and it installed in a different folder from the previous one, by default. Now, I have two different executables of the game installed, their shortcuts' icons are different, and the savegames seem compatible with both.

Is this 2.0.0 really a new version of the game, even though there's no mention of it in the changelog? I'll probably keep playing on the new install, since the savegames from the old one are functional. Also, should I apply the 1.0.1 patch on this "2.0.0" install?
no, 2.0.0 is the new installer GOG has been switching to and whenever they upgrade the installer for a older title they add any patches and updates to the game, so no need to update again unless of course there is another patch that comes up in the mean time.
Post edited February 23, 2013 by DCT
avatar
Lenok: I downloaded and installed La-Mulana a while back, and I believe that at the time, the "Windows installer" in the game tab was set as version 1.0.0. Afterwards, when the Universal update to 1.0.1 came out, I also installed it without an issue and played a bit of the game.

However, looking at the game in my library today, I see that the installer is in version 2.0.0, with the update still available. I don't recall having been warned of this change as I usually am when there is an update to a game on GOG. I downloaded the new installer, and it installed in a different folder from the previous one, by default. Now, I have two different executables of the game installed, their shortcuts' icons are different, and the savegames seem compatible with both.

Is this 2.0.0 really a new version of the game, even though there's no mention of it in the changelog? I'll probably keep playing on the new install, since the savegames from the old one are functional. Also, should I apply the 1.0.1 patch on this "2.0.0" install?
avatar
DCT: no, 2.0.0 is the new installer GOG has been switching to and whenever they upgrade the installer for a older title they add any patches and updates to the game, so no need to update again unless of course there is another patch that comes up in the mean time.
Thanks for the info!