Exactly. What is the point of releasing different versions if you can't revert.
Well, I mean: bug-fixing, engine improvements, more support for modders... there are lots of reasons to release new versions...
@subtledoctor No, those are not reasons to release new versions to us. They could simply release updates without version control (that is visible to consumers).
I don't see the issue as you do. If someone releases an old release and clearly states that it's released as-is without any further support etc, what does it matter if a few ppl starts threads asking for support? They would just be told that it's not supported and to move on, "take it, or leave it" sorta.
But, this is already the case right now. So I really don't understand why there are these threads by people saying "Beamdog should let us play v1.3!!"
You can. Right now. It's there for you to play, in the Steam beta tab. Why is anyone even talking about this?
Because some people don't want anything to do with Steam due to their DRM.
Because some people don't want anything to do with Steam due to their DRM.
How the hell is that Beamdog's problem? Why should Beamdog have to release -- and support (yes, that is absolutely required) -- an old version because some people can't stand Steam?
Because some people don't want anything to do with Steam due to their DRM.
The Steam version of the Enhanced Edition games are not DRM-protected. You can easily uninstall the Steam client after installing the games and start them directly.
Because, that's the other side you made a contract with (and it says nothing about steam being required).
And there is no support required, it never was. Back in the 90s™ you could play/use version 1.0 of any given software and apply any of the later released patches to your liking. Noone expected to get fixes or support to their old version.
Also, don't you see the irony in promoting 3rd party software to get better support for the game you bought directly from the devs?
It was a pleasure.
BTW, really admire your display of Menschenmaterial attitude, don't know if you are too much aware of it. But in any case, interesting.
Because some people don't want anything to do with Steam due to their DRM.
How the hell is that Beamdog's problem? Why should Beamdog have to release -- and support (yes, that is absolutely required) -- an old version because some people can't stand Steam?
I don't agree with you that they'd have to support it and I assume it would be easy to provide a download. It's not so much a 'problem' as an opportunity to offer the version that was available for a long period of time and to which many people grew accustomed and attached. Now, @argent77 just pointed out that the Steam version is DRM free and that you can then remove the Steam client (I didn't know this). That certainly makes the Steam option much more appealing, but I still don't think it's a bad idea to offer a download directly from your Beamdog account. It's just better service.
but I still don't think it's a bad idea to offer a download directly from your Beamdog account. It's just better service.
Meh - imho fixing bugs and adding features and releasing expansions, and letting me play the newest version with fewer bugs and more features and cool expansions... is better service. But to each his own.
(Speaking of which, where is 2.2 for iOS??? I don't want to play 1.3 anymore!)
No argument with you about continuing to fix bugs and improve the game. I happen to be using 2.2 and I'm enjoying it (although admittedly it took until the last patch for me to say that). I just don't see a problem with having an older version available for those who like it while they continue to develop and offer support for v.2.
v2.0 slightly changed the system requirements because of some of the graphics changes, which means that for some people, v1.3 is the last version of the game their computer will support. That's why the option is there at all; I wouldn't expect the v1.3 option to be removed from the beta list on Steam any time soon, if ever.
This is a decent reason for continuing to allow v1.3 be downloaded in a limited fashion, but I still do not agree with the OP's poll, which was that every 1.x version should be available for download.
And there is no support required, it never was. Back in the 90s™ you could play/use version 1.0 of any given software and apply any of the later released patches to your liking. Noone expected to get fixes or support to their old version.
From my recollection, that's not quite true. You could continue to play the version on your CD, but, as an example, vendors often pulled Patch 1 as a separate download and rolled it into Patch 2. The latest patch was designed to update any install (from v1.0 to v1.[x-1]) to v1.x. So, you could play v1.0 or v1.2, but unless you saved Patch 1, v1.1 was gone.
And if I bought a CD with v1.2, I never expected to get a v1.0 "downgrader" download from the vendor.
I don't see the issue as you do. If someone releases an old release and clearly states that it's released as-is without any further support etc, what does it matter if a few ppl starts threads asking for support? They would just be told that it's not supported and to move on, "take it, or leave it" sorta.
But, this is already the case right now. So I really don't understand why there are these threads by people saying "Beamdog should let us play v1.3!!"
You can. Right now. It's there for you to play, in the Steam beta tab. Why is anyone even talking about this?
I understand why you think I'm arguing for older versions, but I'm kinda not. I'm just discussing the topic of whether or not a company like beamdog can release an unsupported older version for those who want it. The possibility of doing it yourself it great I guess, but isn't really necessary for the discussion.
But the questions was "Should they have option to play the game with components they bought even if it meant that they will no longer be supported? ". Did you somehow manage to miss the quite essential part of that sentence about no support?
You don't understand. They cannot, in good conscience, NOT support it. Stating that they're releasing a version that will be unsupported after they release it is 1) a PR nightmare and 2) a terrible business move. No company that understands its customers, in even the most superficial way, is going to actually release an unsupported version as an official product.
I would like to see a source on that other than your statement of being a software developer. Last I heard, a developer didn't really work with marketing, so maybe you can understand if I take your word for this quite lightly. It's obvious from the examples of ie Paradox that older versions can be released without support and give not negative feedback, but instead positive. So why do you claim the opposite would befell beamdog should the opt to do the same?
As much as I disagree with the DLC policy of Paradox Games, the way they handle the patch issue is superb. You can play any version from 1.0 to the latest build.
This requires teams that support those older versions, even if it's just 2 or 3 support guys who sit on the phone with dumb customers and go through a list of troubleshooting steps. That's 2 or 3 support guys that have to be paid and who cannot be utilized in other endeavors.
Again, it would be great to see some kind of support for that claim. If something is unsupported, why would you keep 2-3 guys working on it? You continuously seem to draw quite odd conclusions which I have trouble understanding.
With all of this said though, I understand this (meaning; the release of prior versions) should probably have been an option from the start in order to make it work good, rather than something you do with just one or two releases to please a part of the crowd. Especially since there are practical ways to do it yourself if you want it. I'm merely discussion the topic from a theoritical point of view rather than a practical.
And there is no support required, it never was. Back in the 90s™ you could play/use version 1.0 of any given software and apply any of the later released patches to your liking. Noone expected to get fixes or support to their old version.
If you honestly believe that support isn't required in today's market, then you have no idea how the markets work today. The reality of today's market is that customers expect more than they did in the '90s or early '00s. They know that you can release a patch that can be downloaded. Back in the '90s or early '00s, it was a bigger deal to fix bugs, because you would have to disperse a new disc to the client. Well, that's expensive. Bugs frequently weren't fixed until expansions came out, for that exact reason. That's not the reality today. You can download a new patch on Steam or in the Beamdog client very easily. The customer WILL demand that support, and you're foolish if you don't think so.
Again, it would be great to see some kind of support for that claim. If something is unsupported, why would you keep 2-3 guys working on it? You continuously seem to draw quite odd conclusions which I have trouble understanding.
Let me say it in plain English. "Unsupported" can no longer be a thing in today's climate.
If you release a product, the customer will expect you to support it. This isn't 1998, where you had to spend months working on a major patch and then dispersing it (the dispersing part was very expensive). In today's climate, the customer knows that you can give them a fairly large patch in a matter of a few weeks. If I've learned one thing as a software developer, it's that no company will release an older version of the product, for the exact reasons I have listed.
Let me say it in plain English. "Unsupported" can no longer be a thing in today's climate.
Just because you say the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true. I find your statements to be based on your own subjective views and wholly unsupported (pun intended).
Unsupported is no problem. Just make it clear to the customer. Have them tick a box "I realize downloading an old version of the game is not supported by Beamdog. Beamdog only provides support for the most up to date version." Thus you pass the responsibility to the customer who wants to download an old version. It's not uncommon.
And there is no support required, it never was. Back in the 90s™ you could play/use version 1.0 of any given software and apply any of the later released patches to your liking. Noone expected to get fixes or support to their old version.
From my recollection, that's not quite true. You could continue to play the version on your CD, but, as an example, vendors often pulled Patch 1 as a separate download and rolled it into Patch 2. The latest patch was designed to update any install (from v1.0 to v1.[x-1]) to v1.x. So, you could play v1.0 or v1.2, but unless you saved Patch 1, v1.1 was gone.
And if I bought a CD with v1.2, I never expected to get a v1.0 "downgrader" download from the vendor.
Alright, the way I phrased that, it's probably an undefendable statement I was trying to say it more like you put it. Because of the way of distribution, CDs, you were able and simultaneousy forced to always install version 1.0 (or the lowest you got) and from then on start patching and since a lot of patches were also mostly distributed via CD, you could, potentially, install any version you prefer or was the last compatible with your specs.
I indeed have no idea how today's markets work, but to have a situation, where
1)People, who bought a physical copy, are stuck on 1.3 and can not patch at all (that for sure did not happen in the 90s ) 2)People, who bought from Beamdog directly, are only able to download the latest version 3)People, who bought from steam, can choose the latest version or version 1.3
doesn't really seem all that thought through.
Everyone knows the alignment of the clever businessman is lawful evil, however Beamdog instead seems to be engaged in some chaotic neutral business practices.
Comments
And there is no support required, it never was. Back in the 90s™ you could play/use version 1.0 of any given software and apply any of the later released patches to your liking. Noone expected to get fixes or support to their old version.
Also, don't you see the irony in promoting 3rd party software to get better support for the game you bought directly from the devs?
It was a pleasure.
BTW, really admire your display of Menschenmaterial attitude, don't know if you are too much aware of it. But in any case, interesting.
Not that i have any longing for 1.3 anyway.
And if I bought a CD with v1.2, I never expected to get a v1.0 "downgrader" download from the vendor.
I would like to see a source on that other than your statement of being a software developer. Last I heard, a developer didn't really work with marketing, so maybe you can understand if I take your word for this quite lightly. It's obvious from the examples of ie Paradox that older versions can be released without support and give not negative feedback, but instead positive. So why do you claim the opposite would befell beamdog should the opt to do the same?
Again, it would be great to see some kind of support for that claim. If something is unsupported, why would you keep 2-3 guys working on it? You continuously seem to draw quite odd conclusions which I have trouble understanding.
With all of this said though, I understand this (meaning; the release of prior versions) should probably have been an option from the start in order to make it work good, rather than something you do with just one or two releases to please a part of the crowd. Especially since there are practical ways to do it yourself if you want it. I'm merely discussion the topic from a theoritical point of view rather than a practical.
Back in the '90s or early '00s, it was a bigger deal to fix bugs, because you would have to disperse a new disc to the client. Well, that's expensive. Bugs frequently weren't fixed until expansions came out, for that exact reason. That's not the reality today. You can download a new patch on Steam or in the Beamdog client very easily. The customer WILL demand that support, and you're foolish if you don't think so. Let me say it in plain English. "Unsupported" can no longer be a thing in today's climate.
If you release a product, the customer will expect you to support it. This isn't 1998, where you had to spend months working on a major patch and then dispersing it (the dispersing part was very expensive). In today's climate, the customer knows that you can give them a fairly large patch in a matter of a few weeks. If I've learned one thing as a software developer, it's that no company will release an older version of the product, for the exact reasons I have listed.
I was trying to say it more like you put it. Because of the way of distribution, CDs, you were able and simultaneousy forced to always install version 1.0 (or the lowest you got) and from then on start patching and since a lot of patches were also mostly distributed via CD, you could, potentially, install any version you prefer or was the last compatible with your specs.
I indeed have no idea how today's markets work, but to have a situation, where
1)People, who bought a physical copy, are stuck on 1.3 and can not patch at all (that for sure did not happen in the 90s
2)People, who bought from Beamdog directly, are only able to download the latest version
3)People, who bought from steam, can choose the latest version or version 1.3
doesn't really seem all that thought through.
Everyone knows the alignment of the clever businessman is lawful evil, however Beamdog instead seems to be engaged in some chaotic neutral business practices.