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

×
Anyone know if this is coming to GOG?
avatar
Crosmando: Anyone know if this is coming to GOG?
Probably not, with the way they responded on this page:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/466560/discussions/0/1354868867708744840/?ctp=2

Yet another 'multiplayer requires steam' excuse.

The comments from users really hurt my brain... people are actually that stupid.
Post edited March 08, 2018 by micktiegs_8
Yes, I had been looking at this myself some time back:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/northguard

What with Evoland being here, but nothing on the horizon yet.
avatar
micktiegs_8: Yet another 'multiplayer requires steam' excuse.
One of the comments said "the game currenlty needs you to be always online". If that is still the case, I can see several reasons why it wouldn't arrive to GOG.

Generally multiplayer and online-heavy games are tricky if it means the developer would have to support two (or more) different online multiplayer platforms, like Steam and Galaxy. Then the Galaxy version would make sense only if they believe it would bring quite a lot of new customers. Of course if they do all the online support themselves to make it store-agnostic, then I guess it wouldn't matter that much.
avatar
Crosmando: Anyone know if this is coming to GOG?
avatar
micktiegs_8: Probably not, with the way they responded on this page:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/466560/discussions/0/1354868867708744840/?ctp=2
The dev comes back on page 4 and says probably not.
avatar
micktiegs_8: Probably not, with the way they responded on this page:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/466560/discussions/0/1354868867708744840/?ctp=2
avatar
drmike: The dev comes back on page 4 and says probably not.
yes, again because of the multiplayer.
avatar
drmike: The dev comes back on page 4 and says probably not.
avatar
micktiegs_8: yes, again because of the multiplayer.
Yup, just wanted to mention that he or she had come back later on.
avatar
micktiegs_8: The comments from users really hurt my brain... people are actually that stupid.
I think I actually lost a few brain cells reading that thread... Steam users really are idiots...
avatar
micktiegs_8: Yet another 'multiplayer requires steam' excuse.
avatar
timppu: One of the comments said "the game currenlty needs you to be always online". If that is still the case, I can see several reasons why it wouldn't arrive to GOG.
Isn't there a single-player mode? Why does it "need" to be always online?

On second thought, bringing a version without multiplayer to GOG would open another can of worms (and user rage). A shame, this one looked good (Age of Empires with Vikings).
avatar
Caesar.: On second thought, bringing a version without multiplayer to GOG would open another can of worms (and user rage). A shame, this one looked good (Age of Empires with Vikings).
As long as there is a meaningful offline single-player campaign, I personally would be fine with the GOG version lacking multiplayer, as I myself wouldn't probably touch the multiplayer part anyway, like I don't in 99.9999% of my games. That didn't stop me from buying e.g. Brutal Legend or Full Spectrum Warrior games from GOG, and various others with no working multiplayer.

But I guess some feel differently and there would be an uproar for the GOG version missing something from the Steam version. Oh well.

In fact, I belong to the school of thought that it is generally better single-player and online multiplayer games are separate games. You don't have to cram both game modes into one game, usually it is better they are not. Either concentrate on making the game single-player, or online multiplayer. Like Team Fortress 2, it doesn't even pretend to be a single-player game, even if you can play maps against computer AI bots, but that is more like a training mode for the real thing, against humans online. Also World of Warcraft, it didn't have a single-player campaign, did it?
Post edited March 10, 2018 by timppu
avatar
Caesar.: On second thought, bringing a version without multiplayer to GOG would open another can of worms (and user rage). A shame, this one looked good (Age of Empires with Vikings).
avatar
timppu: As long as there is a meaningful offline single-player campaign, I personally would be fine with the GOG version lacking multiplayer, as I myself wouldn't probably touch the multiplayer part anyway, like I don't in 99.9999% of my games. That didn't stop me from buying e.g. Brutal Legend or Full Spectrum Warrior games from GOG, and various others with no working multiplayer.

But I guess some feel differently and there would be an uproar for the GOG version missing something from the Steam version. Oh well.
Did those games eventually added multiplayer functionality, or did they stay that way? I am like you in that regard, I almost never go multiplayer, so a single-player version could actually interest me.

Maybe the controversy would be controlled if the game was cheaper to compensate for the lack of multiplayer?
avatar
Caesar.: On second thought, bringing a version without multiplayer to GOG would open another can of worms (and user rage). A shame, this one looked good (Age of Empires with Vikings).
avatar
timppu: [...]

In fact, I belong to the school of thought that it is generally better single-player and online multiplayer games are separate games. You don't have to cram both game modes into one game, usually it is better they are not. Either concentrate on making the game single-player, or online multiplayer. Like Team Fortress 2, it doesn't even pretend to be a single-player game, even if you can play maps against computer AI bots, but that is more like a training mode for the real thing, against humans online. Also World of Warcraft, it didn't have a single-player campaign, did it?
I agree.