GOG Galaxy users can now rollback any game updates

[Guest]

Steam is really falling behind right now. I can't find a changelog.

[Blackbird 54]

Only game on Steam I know that has this is ETS2, but it's not really that much useful for me so eh.

[Guest]

I also should bring up something a Reddit user pointed out (can't find the source, will have to do this from memory): most developers will rollback any flawed patches so users don't get stuck with an unusable game. As such, this is kinda redundant.

 

Now, if you're talking about rolling back to the last version of the game in which mod x works, then yeah - this is a great move as you'll at least be able to still use the mod until they update for the new version. Of course, the downside from a developer's perspective is now GOG Galaxy will actively allow fragmentation (i.e. groups of people using different versions/revisions of your software/OS/whatever) within games; thus, you can no longer guarantee someone will be using the latest version of the game like with Steam - making support requests that much more intensive.

[Guest]

There have been plenty of times where I'd rather rollback, GTA SA is a very recent example.

[Guest]

There have been plenty of times where I'd rather rollback, GTA SA is a very recent example.

True. If a game developer decides to "update" their game in order to remove features and such which do not harm the game in any way - and may, in fact, diminish the game - then that's another use for GOG Galaxy's new feature.

[Blackbird 54]

There have been plenty of times where I'd rather rollback, GTA SA is a very recent example.

Good point, but R* is stupid in general when it comes to old GTAs especially with SA that boxed them into corner with HC. Doubt they'd allow 1.0 of it due to that.

[Guest]

I'd rather emulate the PS2 versions at this point, I never realized the PC versions were so gimped anyway. That also reminded me of SpiderMan 2, jesus what happened to the PC version.

[Mirh 103]

I also should bring up something a Reddit user pointed out (can't find the source, will have to do this from memory): most developers will rollback any flawed patches so users don't get stuck with an unusable game. As such, this is kinda redundant.

I really don't know which developers you know, but I hardly ever seen one so kind.

Especially from "lovely" people like Activision, EA and Rockstar.

 

Now, if you're talking about rolling back to the last version of the game in which mod x works, then yeah - this is a great move as you'll at least be able to still use the mod until they update for the new version. Of course, the downside from a developer's perspective is now GOG Galaxy will actively allow fragmentation (i.e. groups of people using different versions/revisions of your software/OS/whatever) within games; thus, you can no longer guarantee someone will be using the latest version of the game like with Steam - making support requests that much more intensive.

It's just not about mod x works. 90% of times is about regressions, performance differences and/or speedruns.

 

Also, fragmentation is hardly a problem, considering this is opt-in.

 

 

 

I'd rather emulate the PS2 versions at this point, I never realized the PC versions were so gimped anyway. That also reminded me of SpiderMan 2, jesus what happened to the PC version.

PC version is better in every conceivable way. Especially after PS2 lighting has been reversed and ported.

 

[Guest]

I'd rather emulate the PS2 versions at this point, I never realized the PC versions were so gimped anyway. That also reminded me of SpiderMan 2, jesus what happened to the PC version.

 

In GTA's case they switched some of their codebases to the mobile versions (I'm not sure why, perhaps the mobile codebases were more stable), which added some features and removed some others. The other issue was the music, and in that case I doubt even GOG would be able to distribute it without incurring very costly lawsuits except for some edge cases.

 

Also, saying "Steam is really falling behind right now." is kind of silly. Most publisher don't take advantage of the Steam version because Steam is publisher-driven where publishers provide the tech support, and they REALLY want to have the latest version because of that. GOG is literally a different paradigm where the storefront itself provides the support.

[Guest]

I really don't know which developers you know, but I hardly ever seen one so kind.

Especially from "lovely" people like Activision, EA and Rockstar.

In recent memory, certainly from the larger companies. In the days before Steam took off, yeah - this was always the case; a 'rollback' in those days was 1) uninstall the game and clean up any straggling files, 2) re-install the game, 3) update the game to the last good version.

 

In all seriousness, thank goodness for GOG Galaxy.

 

 

Also, fragmentation is hardly a problem, considering this is opt-in.

Wait until a developer tries to pull a GTA:SA on GOG.com now....

[Mirh 103]

In GTA's case they switched some of their codebases to the mobile versions (I'm not sure why, perhaps the mobile codebases were more stable), which added some features and removed some others. The other issue was the music, and in that case I doubt even GOG would be able to distribute it without incurring very costly lawsuits except for some edge cases.

No they didn't. They just included XInput support and removed songs (unless you are implying that having the same music of the mobile version is using the same "codepath")

And it has been kind of idiotic move, considering I had bought the game before license expired.

So, I'm not a lawyer, but I believe my purchase included it and I don't remember last time San Andreas was meant to be SaaS

 

oh, they also removed DRM

Wait until a developer tries to pull a GTA:SA on GOG.com now....

What?

You mean that this way we would need other tools to downgrade to 1.0 compatible one?

 

Well, to be honest, Steam version is already DRM-free. So I don't think game will change at all

 

Speaking more in general.. if games were all like san andreas, then the exact notion of "releasing patches" would be bad, because it change addresses in the executable and all.

Though, you seem to forgot the reason behind this problem: every version after the first one was a half-assed attempt to restrict what you could do with the game

But this is only a R* custom thanks god.

 

Also, saying "Steam is really falling behind right now." is kind of silly. Most publisher don't take advantage of the Steam version because Steam is publisher-driven where publishers provide the tech support, and they REALLY want to have the latest version because of that. GOG is literally a different paradigm where the storefront itself provides the support.

In all seriousness, thank goodness for GOG Galaxy.

Aww, world is beautiful because it's different.

 

Anyway, imo. Steam is fine (it doesn't prevent you from doing this, e.g. Arma 3 or Red Faction Guerilla)

GOG is trying to be intrinsically better in every concept and kudos to them.

[Guest]

In GTA's case they switched some of their codebases to the mobile versions (I'm not sure why, perhaps the mobile codebases were more stable), which added some features and removed some others. The other issue was the music, and in that case I doubt even GOG would be able to distribute it without incurring very costly lawsuits except for some edge cases.

 

Also, saying "Steam is really falling behind right now." is kind of silly. Most publisher don't take advantage of the Steam version because Steam is publisher-driven where publishers provide the tech support, and they REALLY want to have the latest version because of that. GOG is literally a different paradigm where the storefront itself provides the support.

I ment as a client or whatever Steam is called.

[Illage2 1]

This is a good thing, an update could break a game and being able to roll back to a playable state is great.