Is this imbibed from the left or right breast of the hooker?

What are you talking about?

New Coke wasn't that bad. :P

Yeah, I live in Florida and we get the bottles of Mexico Coca-Cola, too and the BJ's sells them by the case in Orlando, Miami (all of South Florida), Kissimmee and some other places, but not on the part of the coast I live.

But take a closer look, because I have noticed that even in the bottles that are a "Product of Mexico" the Mexican Coke is now using HFCS instead of cane sugar, too.

It is in Canada, too. And other places. It isn't the subsidies, it is just that HFCS is much cheaper to produce and use than cane sugar. Cane sugar can only be grown in certain areas also (tropical, sub-tropical areas, hurricane areas) which is why it is basically only done is Hawaii, Florida, Louisiana on any real sort of scale. Corn be grown in a lot more places and weather may crush a corn crop in one are, but not others. It is pretty impossible to wipe out an entire state or several states like Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Indiana, etc. all together. We can produce so much corn for so little that is is used as feed for everything, too - chickens, cattle, pork. Almost every cereal is also corn based.

Our subsidies for corn is pretty much for E-85 Ethanol - total BS it is too.

Apparently (unless I am missing something), that isn't happening here yet.

Attached is bottle shot from those I purchased just the other day.

* * * * *

OT I prefer "classic" GOG. Don't care to run any clients and thus don't really have a use for having them included in the downlow. But choice is good; and another reason I like GOG.

The short answer is that the installed games are identical regardless of which you choose. The difference is that a few months ago GOG started taking their standalone installers and updating them to include a copy of GOG Galaxy directly in the installer, so that when you download them now it will install Galaxy by default "as a customer convenience", however a lot of customers were not to happy about this for several reasons. One being that not all GOG customers use nor want to use Galaxy, and thus do not want to have it forced upon them when it is advertised as being "optional" since day one. Two, it bloats out every single game installer it is added to by however big the Galaxy components are that they include in the installer. Originally if I understand correctly it was the full blown Galaxy installer, however I believe they claimed they would change it to just install a stub installer that downloads the full blown installer later. Whether they actually did that or not I'm not sure.

So to compromise, they decided they would provide the new Galaxy bloated installers as the new way forward, and reinstate the original standalone installers by calling them "Classic". That is the only difference. Whether you install a game via the classic installer, Galaxy bloated installers, or install via Galaxy directly you get the exact same game when all is said and done. If the game includes any optional features that are provided by the Galaxy API and client, you will naturally need to have Galaxy installed in order for those features to work, such as games that use the Galaxy multiplayer matchmaking feature for example. Other than that however, there are no differences in the actual installed games regardless of what you install.

This is not true. As noted recently the Classic version of Riven is inferior to the galaxy version which has better sound files. There has been no real list however it does raise the question of what other games have inferior classic versions.

If this is the case, it isn't something intentional. GOG makes screwups sometimes and things are not all synchronized. To suggest that it is intentional static purposeful difference between the Galaxy installation of a game and the standalone downloadable version is just irresponsible portrayal of things. If and when such screwups occur, one simply has to inform GOG of the problem and they generally fix it within hours to a few days depending on how busy they are. Cherry picking one off screwups like this is an invalid comparison.

Ah yes. Problem found, it's just small mistake, lots of those happening at the moment. Simple fact is they want to move away from anything other than galaxy, not going to go over each post on this, nor am I going to do an in depth study on differences between versions. You said classic is exactly the same as galaxy version, I supply one where that statement is not true, simple. Another difference is the inclusion of galaxy installer, and in some cases patches are longer (a lot longer) coming than the classic version, hence the two versions are not the same. Word it however you like, nothing irresponsible about pointing out facts, deliberately ignoring facts to spontaneously defend GOG all the time however is.

Probably yes it is a mistake. You ignore that for Arcanum the Galaxy Version is worse than the Installer Version as mentioned in the same thread whre the Risen problem was mentioned ;)

And somehow I doubt the Installer Versions of Risen are different except one bundling Galaxy with it. Just when Galaxy is started and you are logged in, it gets updated.

As hohiro pointed out above, the reverse problem happens also unintentionally and I have experienced it both ways, where the Galaxy version of something was broken or out of date but the standalone was fine (Xenonauts). Reported to GOG and was fixed rather quickly. Same is true when its' the other way around.

The difference between what I'm saying and what you're saying, is that you seem to have an agenda suggesting that GOG purposefully makes Galaxy shine with a gleam and purposefully breaks standalone games to "convince" people to move to Galaxy as some kind of conspiracy theory, and I see GOG as being a company that does a lot of things by human hand including some things that could potentially be feasibly automated, and as a result they constantly introduce inconsistencies into what they do without any particular bias, and I do so without any conspiracy theories or agenda to promote.

I don't deny that problems exist, but I don't cherry pick them to push a specific agenda of how I'd like to believe things are either. It's quite simple, if someone experiences a problem - report it to GOG via a support ticket, and mention it in the "What did just break" thread. File a bug in mantis if it makes sense to do so as well. GOG will fix the problem generally, however sometimes it may take a few round trips of communication for them to understand the full situation. Sometimes contacting Judas via PM or one of the other blues can get something fixed as well. Judas has quickly fixed numerous problems of the sort you describe above for me when I've mentioned them to him for example.

Before you go purporting me to have some kind of pro-Galaxy pro-GOG blind fanboy status with any form of verbiage, I suggest you search the forums for the multitude of posts of me kicking GOG in the balls for some of the fuckups they make, such as the ones I've posted in the last day or so in the Gaming deals thread for example, or any number of dozens of others.

When GOG does something good, they'll get praise from me. When they screw something up, I'll call them on it or even go as far as to bust their chops a bit. Plenty of evidence of this from me throughout the forums over time. My commentary is about as balanced as is possible. If you don't care to dig through the full forums yourself, simply peruse the "What did just break" or Galaxy beta threads for a plethora of posts from me kicking them in the nuts for legit screwups. Just because someone praises GOG for some things or defends them on some things doesn't mean they have fanboy bias and GOG can do no wrong. It isn't a case of "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists.", there are a multitude of shades of grey depending on the topic at hand and the specific details. I don't look at what they do with a predetermined outcome in my mind from the start looking at things with confirmation bias. If someone has a predetermined view about this stuff though and goes looking for a particular result, they'll surely find what they're looking for, nicely pre-constructed in their own mind.

Sorry, you can write all the novels you want to. You stated that all games on here were the same galaxy or classic, that is not the case. Be it "accident" or the ongoing pushing of galaxy, which I suppose also doesn't happen or is an accident, it does happen and the op should know this.

And yes, I ha e to just reply as the site is broken on mobile, just like updates are broken on the site, totally accidentally of course.

You are just being argumentive and toxic for the sake of being argumentive and toxic. I have nothing further to discuss with you.

The most recent discussion about Riven led to the OP submitting a support ticket regarding this specific issue. I'm (still) waiting to hear GOG's reply before forming a definite opinion on the matter. However, it's not a good sign that GOG's initial reason for not including the better audio files in the standalone installer was to keep the potential number of support tickets low, while the version that the client installs is the better one for at least a year.



Since I followed that discussion, GOG didn't bother looking into this because the bug reports referred to a previous version of the client, and told users to check after updating. Do you know if the problem persists with the latest version of the client, and if yes, did anyone report it?

Having said that, there is a difference between the two cases. What if the standalone installer offers an inferior version of the game and the client is not an option? There is no Linux version of the client, so those users are limited to the standalone installers by default. In the reverse case, people have always the option to use the standalone installers until the issue is addressed, and it will be addressed in a timely fashion simply because GOG Galaxy is a priority.


I don't think anyone claimed that the Galaxy-laden version of a standalone installer would be updated to install a better version of a game, while the Galaxy-free one wouldn't. But this isn't even relevant in the case of Riven, because Riven doesn't have a Galaxy-laden installer. And since Galaxy-free standalone installers don't update a game after it's been installed, it's reasonable to expect the installer itself to be up to date and on par with the better version that the client downloads and installs from the get go. And that is what that discussion, and the previous one(s), was about.