Posted August 21, 2017
advowson: On the subject, how about a bit more transparency about pending updates and update policies? For example, GOG's offering of AI War is more than 2 years out of date. AI War's developer says they sent a new update to GOG, but it clearly never arrived. The GOG store page for AI War makes no mention of how badly outdated GOG's offering is. The only ways to discover this are for the in-game updater to successfully call home and then start asking to update (and, according to another recent post, that update doesn't even install correctly, though it runs fine once the user works around the bad update) or for the user to go browse the developer's changelog and notice the severe discrepancy between the in-game version number and the entries in the changelog.
,,,
Yet in all that two years, what's the dev actually done about it? ,,,
Simple fact is, it's the devs responsibility to update all versions of their game, wherever they sold them.
If they "send" an update, and game fails to update on GOG, the dev needs to find out why.
Not shrug their shoulders, and ignore it.
Over 2 years of inactivitty, suggests it's the dev that doesn't give a damn, and I wouldn't be surprised if the update was never semt.
This is such an example, update was sent to a testing channel, only dev can access.
Misunderstanding was quickly sorted out, and the patch released.
Since Galaxy came out, it's easier than ever for a dev to provide updates on GOG.
GOG's only responsible for packaging the offline installers, once they have the update on the Galaxy release channel.
Providing the update is always the devs responsibilty, and simply saying we sent one, doesn't change it.
Even if the dev did send one, as in this game, it has to be sent on the release channel, to be added automatically.
Post edited August 21, 2017 by UhuruNUru