Well, I was pretty feisty yesterday. I guess what vexed me most of all was that the word was not shared when the earlier decision to post 2.0 to SDC was changed. I know enough about coding to know that a serious project is a big, hairy mess of stuff that can spawn unexpected problems anytime, anywhere. Working with a peanut gallery outside every virtual window of your shop can't make the job any easier. Apologies for not being more sympathetic while I was being so demanding about a free update.

From what I have read so far, it would mean a lot more testing and changes to ensure it works with SDC.

Everything's solved now. I had not played GC2/DA/TA for sometime (since the latest patch i think) and i had not updated Impulse neither.  Impulse didn't autoupdate, possibly because i had a very early version, since i had given it only a quick test run when it come. Updated it manually (BTW, i was very tired last night too when i tried to patch the, i may have done something wrong). TA patch did go wrong place.. to /GalCiv2 directory, not /Twilight sub-directory. Impulse did not ask me where to put the files (but then it's a patch) today when i reinstalled the game since i forgot to adjust preferrences... But how come it installed the patch wrong place?

I uninstalled everything today, though apparently i did not uninstall DA/TA correctly (or Vista didn't remove the registry path ) since GC2 did go to C: drive (as i had forgotted to set Impulse to ask...), no problem with that even if it's on wrong place really  (but no matter, at least it works), but DA and TA were installed to D:, to the old location. This time i uninstalled the expansions with Impulse, HAD TO RE-DOWNLOAD them (why can't the Impulse keep the files?) and they did install to correct place and everything works now fine. Except i wasted 3 hours doing this today, and Impulse refused to launch after i had accidentally closed it and i had to reboot the computer to get it work...

As for download pausing and cancelling, my bad. I just didn't find the buttons but then i was tired (at 1AM (GMT+2) or so...)

I don't like the Impulse. Impulse is slow and SDC did the same (patches GC2, only reason i (had to) download SDC at first place) and broke promise caused me to waste over 3 hours.

And please tell me Elemental doesn't require that monstrous program and that it can be patched without it....

Only compliment i can give to Impulse is that it's at least better than EA download manager which fails 4 times out of 5 when it comes patching etc. Looks good too, though i'm wondering if it's slow due looks...

This is a bummer.  SDC always worked great for my simple needs (updating software I'd PURCHASED).  There is nothing Impulse offers beyond that that I want or need, and in fact, it looks like bloatware and glitzware that I really dislike.

I really don't like being forced to use software I don't want or need, like Impulse, just to update ONE game I already own.

I'm sure I'll eventually have to bite bullet and install Impulse to get Elemental some day (could buy it retail but it'll surely need/get multiple updates via Impulse only), but I was hoping that day would be far, far away.

I propose an update to the Gamers Bill of Rights.  No company shall force paying customers to use update software they don't want to use to update software they've purchased.  Or.  No company shall change the update mechanism on a game many have purchased to a new mechanism many don't want to endure.

<sigh>

From https://www.stardock.com/media/stardockcustomerreport-2008.pdf

"*Illegitimate complaint: Requires people to get updates through a specific source (Steam, Impulse, publisher secure website, etc.). This is one of our biggest pet peeves. If a game ships and there’s some bug found that materially affects gameplay, then sure, put out a patch wherever. However, we’ve had users complain loudly that Sins of a Solar Empire v1.1 (essentially a free expansion pack) requires Impulse to download. Publishers have every right to make sure the people downloading updates are legitimate customers."

Yeah, ofc you have the right... but remember your own Gamer's Rights:

"4. Gamers shall have the right to have their games not require a third-party download manager installed in order for the game to function."

In some cases patch might be required so that a game starts working (IE patch that adds compability for another OS (extreme example but anyway). If i'm required to have an additional program to get the game function...

"8. Gamers have the right to use their games without being inconvenienced due to copy protection or digital rights management."

Yeah right. If Impulse or any other 3rd party program is used to check if the customer has legal copy, it pretty much can cause inconvenience for a customer...

Nice start for the Gamer's Rights.

-----------------------------------------------

Said this on the other thread... Quote from https://forums.galciv2.com/329116/page/2/#replies

I think i'm gonna be fine with Impulse if it's gonna be faster, simpler and doesn't offer me too much.. How about a Lite version? Patches games, let's you re-download the ones you've registered, or something like that. Just don't brake promises anymore.

well keeping in mind that I'm as pissed as everyone else for the "no SDC support"

that said I think the gamer's bill of rights is a project ... nowhere did stardock said that they were perfect in every move and that all their games followed the famous gamer's bill of rights ..

example : AFAIK, stardock doesn't reimburse galciv2 buys :

1.  Gamers shall have the right to return games that are incompatible or do not function at a
reasonable level of performance for a full refund within a reasonable amount of time.

you guys think of it like this :

there's a development budget which was going to be shared between : a)developing and fixing 2.0 b)putting it through impulse c)putting it through SDC

at some point a) became too big and c) was dropped to contain the budget

moreover I think it's also a question of development "man-month" since they already said that they desperatly need more staff ...

Every now and then, some software vendor starts to drop their entire code base and recode a new one in .NET. Named reasons are that it is the next big thing in Windows programming, the coders like C# compared to their previous language, Mono can offer an escape to the Microsoft lock-in that current code has or perceived security because of the managed environment.

However, these reïmplementations usually follow a recurring pattern:

• It is often not realised that .NET is orders of magnitude less efficient than native code, which therefore cannot be solved by waiting until faster computers are available. The new codebase is usually a lot slower than the other codebase, causing complaints from users.
  
• It is often not realised that .NET is a moving target that forces both vendor and users to upgrade. While the Win32 API has been reasonable stable for a decade, .NET 1.x code had to be ported to 2.x. Users need to keep up with this and keep investing time and/or money in keeping their software current. Upgrading software can require other software upgrades and ultimately hardware upgrades. (It is a public known secret that .NET had to push users to Longhorn, which would have it's user interface written in .NET. As this turned out to be unfeasible from a system requirements point of view, and so Vista nowadays has a native code user interface.)
• It is often not realised that .NET causes all kind of software deployment problems. After all, users need to install the .NET version the program depends on. This increases the work the user has to do to get the program running and increases technical support costs, but more important, it prevents users that not in control of their computer (either technically forbiddden or because someone does not want them to do the intrusive install).

Further, the perceived advantages often don't play out as hoped. Rather than the whole world moving to .NET, people are preparing of moving to Win64. Mono does not give you Linux support for free at all, in practise the Microsoft lock-in might turn out worse. And so on.

Now about Impulse. It behaves like the typical .NET application. People are suffering from deployment problems like they cannot deploy the program on Win2000. People are experiencing the program as being bloatware, taking ages to load and using too much memory. Thinking about issues I don't like about Impulse, I can find few complaints of Impulse that are not .NET related. The program itself is not perfect, but very usable as a place to shop for games and install them.

Wut? SDC had higher opposition... well i can imagine. I was pretty pissed when i realised i have to get it to patch the game. I strongly dislike digital distribution platforms... they just feel wrong. Though i was happy after i realised that SDC made patching pretty easy, problem is changing it to a new thing when old works fine.

Sole soul: ty for help. I hope you got your game working.

Hmm comparing this to WoW makes me feel better. Sometimes making WoW requires complete unistall and reinstall and re-downloading patches, which takes easily 5+ hours, and can happen quite frequently... I know that one friend has reinstalled WoW 20 times...  With SD, i haven't had any problems before, first time is especially frustrating, but was to be excepted. I hate hindsight... Being ill while trying to get things work didn't make this any easier. Just one hope: SD, don't break your promises anymore.

As much as one might dislike the change from SDC to Impulse, sometimes you just have to grit your teeth and move along with the times. I mean, I didn't like Impulse much at first either, being slower and more "cluttered" than SDC, but then again I was also a person who cursed Windows 95 and all games that required it instead of my trusty MS-DOS 6.2, and likewise when Windows XP came and I was all snug and comfortable with my 98 SE. At some point the old system, despite how well it works for its time, needs to be replaced to meet future needs.

Frankly, while I'm not overjoyed about Impulse (needs a little bit more speed, especially in page loads), it is pure bliss compared to the crap you're forced to endure if you buy any EA game these days, with crappy, buggy Securom "protection" and arbitrary install limits that inconvenience no one but legitimate customers.

Oh, and while on the topic World of Warcraft: Just had to reinstall the other day myself, due to a file corruption that the repair utility couldn't handle. Installed vanilla WoW. Tried to install TBC, but got an error saying I needed patch 2.0 first. Downloaded patch 2.0 excruciatingly slowly, then when I tried to install it, no go: Needs patch 1.12 first. Another slow download; Blizzard downloader was giving me 20kB/sec on it, so I had to search the web for a non-dead direct download. Finally got the patches and TBC installed, went to install the 3.0 patch (which I had backed up)... Beeeep. Needs patch 2.4.3 first. Which needed patch 2.4.0.... which needed etc etc etc. I might have mucked up some version numbers somewhere, but that's roughly how the evening went. So yeah, Impulse patching doesn't really look all that bad to me

SDC was getting very long in thte tooth and while it did what it did well . . it was dated.  It'd been patched to death itself and needed a rewrite.

I was there for it and it did suck.  The impulse transition has gone much better much faster.  Expect great things from Impulse.  Things like the matchmaking (already in place for "the Political Machine").  The achievement tracking should be a boon to gamers too.

Impulse isn't the devil, it's jsut different.  And it's getting better all the time.

yup SDC interface is horrid for browsing through available games & utils

anyone knows if impulse is planned to be independant from internet so that you'll be able to deploy your games on an offline computer ?

Whismer, are you asking whether you can play offline after you install via Impulse or whether you can use Impulse to get a setup file you can transfer to an Internet-shielded computer via a local network or removeable media? Seabass seems to have assumed you mean the former, but I thought you were asking about the latter.

They made a descion.  One that they hope is good for everyone (Yes, even you.  They want to keep selling you games or whatever.)

Now you know the new policy.  Install Impulse, patch up, uninstall Impulse, go on with your life.  It'll be fine.