Shadowcat on 24/6/2011 at 16:14
Thus far, page 47 has been something of a disappointment :)
(and I look forward to the duplicate being deleted, whereupon the sole subject of this message will be this message...)
dexterward on 24/6/2011 at 16:33
Sorry `bout that. It`s the Joys of Mobile Internet - i.e. nothing happening for minutes.
But then, I thought your side deals with double posts somehow - it happened before and I got the "double, you`ll be redirected..." message.
Brian The Dog on 28/6/2011 at 12:13
Today's new release is (
http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/spellforce_2_dragon_storm) Spellforce 2: Dragon Storm, which is an expansion pack for the previously released Spellforce 2: Shadow Wars. Dragon Storm is a stand-alone expansion pack, but costs $9.99, so I'll be skipping it. I'm hoping that GOG won't release expansion packs separately, one thing I liked about GOG's release is that the games were (generally) their gold editions.
EvaUnit02 on 30/6/2011 at 19:21
Quote Posted by dexterward
As with most things with GOG I don`t have a beef with
whythey doing something, but I do with
how they go about it.
So, yeah they sort of compete with Steam...but then only sort of. GOG is a niche operation - selling old classics (it`s even in the name) with no DRM. They`re not in totally direct competition. Other Steam competitors just sell games - and they`re not doing too bad either.
Regardless - ok, they needed to promote themselves, but was it really necessary to do it in such infantile fashion? This crybaby statement about Steam`s prices as compared to us poor chickens
Is there a lot of overlap in their catalogues? Yes. You admit yourself that they're competing with Steam. Steam is like your high street shop (eg HMV), they deal in many markets. GOG is a large specialist in one market, not quite "mum and pop" by a long stretch though - I agree with you.
Steam doesn't seem to care, the large amount of the time legacy titles are just dumped onto the service with no Quality Assurance. Often users are left to fend for themselves with homebrew compatibility patches for XP/Vista/7/whatever and the like. Oh, if there's a big issue that affects a large group of users and enough fuss is kicked on their forum, they might put up something along the lines of a "Not compatible with Windows 7" disclaimer on the game's storefront page - but not until after the likes of a weekend deal of course, with many people falling for the trap.
A lot of games with Redbook audio scores (i.e. they streamed off the game CD) are absent from the Steam releases of several older games. If there's such games on GOG, they tend to come loaded with a mini-disc image and special EXE which seamlessly runs the game with aforementioned image (eg Kingpin, Descent 2).
sNeaksieGarrett on 1/7/2011 at 03:30
Oh wow. Yep, I already own it as well. I remember where I bought it too. It was at a local target; I had the cardboard box for years but I finally threw it out recently.
dexterward on 1/7/2011 at 12:41
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Is there a lot of overlap in their catalogues? Yes. You admit yourself that they're competing with Steam. Steam is like your high street shop (eg HMV), they deal in many markets. GOG is a large specialist in one market, not quite "mum and pop" by a long stretch though - I agree with you.
Steam doesn't seem to care, the large amount of the time legacy titles are just dumped onto the service with no Quality Assurance. Often users are left to fend for themselves with homebrew compatibility patches for XP/Vista/7/whatever and the like. Oh, if there's a big issue that affects a large group of users and enough fuss is kicked on their forum, they might put up something along the lines of a "Not compatible with Windows 7" disclaimer on the game's storefront page - but not until after the likes of a weekend deal of course, with many people falling for the trap.
A lot of games with Redbook audio scores (i.e. they streamed off the game CD) are absent from the Steam releases of several older games. If there's such games on GOG, they tend to come loaded with a mini-disc image and special EXE which seamlessly runs the game with aforementioned image (eg Kingpin, Descent 2).
It`s all true/agree with. So I sort of can`t tell/don`t remember if we`re arguing?
I was just picking on their marketing style - which is a matter of personal taste - thats all. They seem to be doing okay anyway...
Shadowcat on 1/7/2011 at 13:20
SWAT 3 is an awesome release. One of my absolute favourite tactical shooters (albeit with as little shooting as you can manage :).
It also beats SWAT 4 in the co-op arena (unless you actually have enough players to fill out an entire squad) by virtue of providing friendly AI squad-mates, and letting you take over an AI character if yours dies.
I could never understand how Irrational and Sierra allowed SWAT 4 to be released without that feature. Its absence basically killed the game for me as far as multiplayer went, yet I feel like it shouldn't have been dramatically difficult to get working. Thanks to the single-player code, they already had friendly AI that knew how to follow commands and engage the enemy. Integrating that into the co-op game seems like an entirely do-able next step.
gunsmoke on 7/7/2011 at 05:29
Did they get online coop working properly? sNeaksie and I about pulled our hair out one week trying to get it to go. Apparently, the servers are dead and you have to go through an insanely roundabout way to play online.
