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

×
Hi everyone

The price rise announcement from last week has ruffled a few feathers here on GOG. We answer a few questions below:

http://compulsiongames.com/en/news/136/weekly-journal-the-deep-breath-before-the-plunge

As we've said all along, you guys are welcome to ask us any questions you have, and we'll do our best to answer.

In the meantime, the team is locking down the August 16 update!

Cheers
Sam
Thanks for the update. I had thought the price update signalled the advent of the full release, my mistake.

I might install and have a bit of a play, but my concern is that I'll ruin the story experience come full release.

Question.
If you were to introduce multi-player (not saying that is the big surprise), but if you were would it definitely have LAN or would it be via private servers only (requiring a Galaxy to play)?
avatar
mechmouse: Thanks for the update. I had thought the price update signalled the advent of the full release, my mistake.

I might install and have a bit of a play, but my concern is that I'll ruin the story experience come full release.

Question.
If you were to introduce multi-player (not saying that is the big surprise), but if you were would it definitely have LAN or would it be via private servers only (requiring a Galaxy to play)?
I wouldn't say you'd ruin it. You'll experience most of Arthur's side quest content but only a small bit of his main path. That being said, if you're the type of person who really wants the full story at once, it's probably better to wait! If you just want to play around in the sandbox for a bit, see what you like/don't like (and maybe even give us feedback) then August 16th would be a great time. It's a really big update mechanically.

Multiplayer, unfortunately not :( The only way we would do multiplayer is if we did some sort of Don't Starve Together type thing - add it on as DLC way down the track. Multiplayer requires so much work - both on the technical and on the design side - that we just can't do it while we're building the game.

In the hypothetical though, I like LAN. I like Galaxy too. I don't really understand why modern games restrict that, but I've also never built a multiplayer game. Might be that there is a good reason I just don't know about. My guess is that very few people play on lan any more so it's not considered good bang for buck in terms of development spent - a similar argument that people make about linux. You'd also have to have some sort of complicated host process if you built your game with a central server in mind.
Post edited August 13, 2017 by Manywhelps
avatar
mechmouse: Thanks for the update. I had thought the price update signalled the advent of the full release, my mistake.

I might install and have a bit of a play, but my concern is that I'll ruin the story experience come full release.

Question.
If you were to introduce multi-player (not saying that is the big surprise), but if you were would it definitely have LAN or would it be via private servers only (requiring a Galaxy to play)?
avatar
Manywhelps: I wouldn't say you'd ruin it. You'll experience most of Arthur's side quest content but only a small bit of his main path. That being said, if you're the type of person who really wants the full story at once, it's probably better to wait! If you just want to play around in the sandbox for a bit, see what you like/don't like (and maybe even give us feedback) then August 16th would be a great time. It's a really big update mechanically.

Multiplayer, unfortunately not :( The only way we would do multiplayer is if we did some sort of Don't Starve Together type thing - add it on as DLC way down the track. Multiplayer requires so much work - both on the technical and on the design side - that we just can't do it while we're building the game.

In the hypothetical though, I like LAN. I like Galaxy too. I don't really understand why modern games restrict that, but I've also never built a multiplayer game. Might be that there is a good reason I just don't know about. My guess is that very few people play on lan any more so it's not considered good bang for buck in terms of development spent - a similar argument that people make about linux. You'd also have to have some sort of complicated host process if you built your game with a central server in mind.
Thanks for the reply. I'm definitely the type who will engross themselves into the story. I'll have a brief play of the post 16th update and give feed back.

I remember you saying multiplayer may be something for much later, but the secrecy around the 16th made me concerned that this might have been the highly requested feature. Hoping your not bluffing to protect the surprise, had a server based multiplayer option been upcoming I'd quickly buy my wife a copy to we can enjoy together. We racked up about 80 hours playing Dying Light and looking forward to the Free DLC's Techland are adding this year.

I understand why developer run servers to let them control, rank and prevent cheats. API's such as Steam and Galaxy also make social gaming easier for both players and developers. However I feel any company making a game (specially a DRM free game) in which multiplayer is a key aspect, that does not include a LAN or private server option is either artificially reducing the life expectancy of the game, or just doesn't believe their game has a lasting appeal.
avatar
Manywhelps: I wouldn't say you'd ruin it. You'll experience most of Arthur's side quest content but only a small bit of his main path. That being said, if you're the type of person who really wants the full story at once, it's probably better to wait! If you just want to play around in the sandbox for a bit, see what you like/don't like (and maybe even give us feedback) then August 16th would be a great time. It's a really big update mechanically.

Multiplayer, unfortunately not :( The only way we would do multiplayer is if we did some sort of Don't Starve Together type thing - add it on as DLC way down the track. Multiplayer requires so much work - both on the technical and on the design side - that we just can't do it while we're building the game.

In the hypothetical though, I like LAN. I like Galaxy too. I don't really understand why modern games restrict that, but I've also never built a multiplayer game. Might be that there is a good reason I just don't know about. My guess is that very few people play on lan any more so it's not considered good bang for buck in terms of development spent - a similar argument that people make about linux. You'd also have to have some sort of complicated host process if you built your game with a central server in mind.
avatar
mechmouse: Thanks for the reply. I'm definitely the type who will engross themselves into the story. I'll have a brief play of the post 16th update and give feed back.

I remember you saying multiplayer may be something for much later, but the secrecy around the 16th made me concerned that this might have been the highly requested feature. Hoping your not bluffing to protect the surprise, had a server based multiplayer option been upcoming I'd quickly buy my wife a copy to we can enjoy together. We racked up about 80 hours playing Dying Light and looking forward to the Free DLC's Techland are adding this year.

I understand why developer run servers to let them control, rank and prevent cheats. API's such as Steam and Galaxy also make social gaming easier for both players and developers. However I feel any company making a game (specially a DRM free game) in which multiplayer is a key aspect, that does not include a LAN or private server option is either artificially reducing the life expectancy of the game, or just doesn't believe their game has a lasting appeal.
It is definitely not multiplayer. You and your wife won't need two copies.

Yeah I don't know man. It probably does lower life expectancy. But when you're in a decision of make X feature (that might make the game amazing) or LAN support, chances are you'll always choose X. It's just not used by a lot of people.
avatar
mechmouse: Thanks for the reply. I'm definitely the type who will engross themselves into the story. I'll have a brief play of the post 16th update and give feed back.

I remember you saying multiplayer may be something for much later, but the secrecy around the 16th made me concerned that this might have been the highly requested feature. Hoping your not bluffing to protect the surprise, had a server based multiplayer option been upcoming I'd quickly buy my wife a copy to we can enjoy together. We racked up about 80 hours playing Dying Light and looking forward to the Free DLC's Techland are adding this year.

I understand why developer run servers to let them control, rank and prevent cheats. API's such as Steam and Galaxy also make social gaming easier for both players and developers. However I feel any company making a game (specially a DRM free game) in which multiplayer is a key aspect, that does not include a LAN or private server option is either artificially reducing the life expectancy of the game, or just doesn't believe their game has a lasting appeal.
avatar
Manywhelps: It is definitely not multiplayer. You and your wife won't need two copies.

Yeah I don't know man. It probably does lower life expectancy. But when you're in a decision of make X feature (that might make the game amazing) or LAN support, chances are you'll always choose X. It's just not used by a lot of people.
I can't wait till the 16th, just can't think what you've got in store.... its not loot crates, is it?

The only other thing I can think would need such secrecy would be modding and mapping tools. Not sure how creating your own maps would work with a procedurally generated world.

I suppose I've just been around long enough to see far too many games become unusable because something outside the players control.
Post edited August 14, 2017 by mechmouse
So many good games are now unplayable because they connected to an external server. Some multiplayer-focused but others with either a large single-player aspect or even fully single-player. I hope this game can be gone back to and enjoyed years from now.
avatar
amcdermo: So many good games are now unplayable because they connected to an external server. Some multiplayer-focused but others with either a large single-player aspect or even fully single-player. I hope this game can be gone back to and enjoyed years from now.
Well we don't have multiplayer, so that at least shouldn't be a problem :) The LAN discussion is purely hypothetical, and we have absolutely no plans for multiplayer. The only way that would change is if the game is a really, really big success, and everybody yelled at us to do it.

Would have to be a very big success though. That's at least a year of development time to do right, in my opinion.
avatar
amcdermo: So many good games are now unplayable because they connected to an external server. Some multiplayer-focused but others with either a large single-player aspect or even fully single-player. I hope this game can be gone back to and enjoyed years from now.
avatar
Manywhelps: Well we don't have multiplayer, so that at least shouldn't be a problem :) The LAN discussion is purely hypothetical, and we have absolutely no plans for multiplayer. The only way that would change is if the game is a really, really big success, and everybody yelled at us to do it.

Would have to be a very big success though. That's at least a year of development time to do right, in my opinion.
it's subtle subversion.

in 2021 when the sequel "We Happy Two" comes out, it will have cooperative multiplayer
avatar
Manywhelps: Well we don't have multiplayer, so that at least shouldn't be a problem :) The LAN discussion is purely hypothetical, and we have absolutely no plans for multiplayer. The only way that would change is if the game is a really, really big success, and everybody yelled at us to do it.

Would have to be a very big success though. That's at least a year of development time to do right, in my opinion.
avatar
mechmouse: it's subtle subversion.

in 2021 when the sequel "We Happy Two" comes out, it will have cooperative multiplayer
Lost opportunity for "We're Happy Too" :)
avatar
mechmouse: it's subtle subversion.

in 2021 when the sequel "We Happy Two" comes out, it will have cooperative multiplayer
avatar
Manywhelps: Lost opportunity for "We're Happy Too" :)
That's much better than mine... You're going to have to make it now.
If this is the last big patch before release does that mean saves can be intact until then? If so, will saves be farked at launch?
avatar
amcdermo: If this is the last big patch before release does that mean saves can be intact until then? If so, will saves be farked at launch?
Nope :( Saves will be irrevocably farked at launch. The whole game will change.
avatar
amcdermo: If this is the last big patch before release does that mean saves can be intact until then? If so, will saves be farked at launch?
avatar
Manywhelps: Nope :( Saves will be irrevocably farked at launch. The whole game will change.
But will they be ok until then?
avatar
Manywhelps: Nope :( Saves will be irrevocably farked at launch. The whole game will change.
avatar
amcdermo: But will they be ok until then?
Should be! No promises, because if we do sneak in a gameplay patch or something the save data might change, but as far as I am aware it should be the same.